FALL 2020 - Volume 67, Number 3 WWW.AFHISTORY.ORG know the past .....Shape the Future The Air Force Historical Foundation Founded on May 27, 1953 by Gen Carl A. “Tooey” Spaatz MEMBERSHIP BENEFITS and other air power pioneers, the Air Force Historical All members receive our exciting and informative Foundation (AFHF) is a nonprofi t tax exempt organization. Air Power History Journal, either electronically or It is dedicated to the preservation, perpetuation and on paper, covering: all aspects of aerospace history appropriate publication of the history and traditions of American aviation, with emphasis on the U.S. Air Force, its • Chronicles the great campaigns and predecessor organizations, and the men and women whose the great leaders lives and dreams were devoted to fl ight. The Foundation • Eyewitness accounts and historical articles serves all components of the United States Air Force— Active, Reserve and Air National Guard. • In depth resources to museums and activities, to keep members connected to the latest and AFHF strives to make available to the public and greatest events. today’s government planners and decision makers information that is relevant and informative about Preserve the legacy, stay connected: all aspects of air and space power. By doing so, the • Membership helps preserve the legacy of current Foundation hopes to assure the nation profi ts from past and future US air force personnel. experiences as it helps keep the U.S. Air Force the most modern and effective military force in the world. • Provides reliable and accurate accounts of historical events. The Foundation’s four primary activities include a quarterly journal Air Power History, a book program, a • Establish connections between generations. biennial symposium, and an awards program. Fall 2020 -Volume 67, Number 3 WWW.AFHISTORY.ORG

know the past .....Shape the Future Features Foundation of Pacific Air War Strategy: Interwar Hawaii Air Operations William Cahill 7 Turncoat and Traitor? Lt. Martin Monti (USAAF) Kenneth P. Werrell 33 The Bomber on the Beach Brian Dervin Dillon 43 The Final Flight of B–17G 43-38856M Don Madar & Jeff Antol 47

Book Reviews SAC Times: A Navigator in the Strategic Air Command By Thomas E. Alexander Review by Gary Connor 50 Victor Boys By Tony Blackman with Gary O’Keefe and 48 Valiant Boys By Tony Blackman and Anthony Wright Review by Gary Connor 50 Lockheed F–104 Starfighter: A History By Martin W. Bowman Review by Paul D. Stone 51 Sighted Sub, Sank Same: The United States Navy’s Air Campaign against the U-Boat By Alan C. Carey Review by Steven D. Ellis 51 Blind Bombing: How Microwave Radar Brought the Allies to D-Day and Victory in World War II By Norman Fine Review by Kenneth P. Werrell 4552 Storm Over Europe: Allied Bombing Missions in the Second World War By Juan Vasquez Garcia Review by Gary Connor 53 Beyond the Quagmire: New Interpretations of the Vietnam War By Geoffrey W. Jensen and Matthew M. Stith Review by John Cirafici 53 KAIS: A True Story of a Daring Rescue in the Swamps of New Guinea, Summer 1944 By Bas Kreuger Review by Scott A. Willey 54 Early Jet Bombers: 1944-1954 By Leo Marriott Review by Golda Eldridge 55 Bait: The Battle of Kham Duc By James D. McLeroy . Review by John Cirafici 55 Helicopter Boys: True Tales from Operators of Military and Civilian Rotorcraft By Richard Pike Review by P. E. Simmons 56 The Luftwaffe in Africa 1941-1943 By Jean-Louis Roba Review by Golda Eldridge 57 Lone Wolf: The Remarkable Story of Britain’s Greatest Nightfighter Ace…-Flt Lt Richard Playne Stevens By Andy Saunders and Terry Thompson Review by Henry L. Zeybel 57 Early French Aviation: 1905-1930 By Graham M. Simons Review by Steven D. Ellis 58 Forgotten Heroes: Aces of the Royal Hungarian Air Force in the Second World War By Csaba B. Stenge Review by Golda Eldridge 59 They’re KIlling My Boys: The History of Hickam Field and the Attacks of 7 December 1941 By J. Michael Wenger Review by Jeffrey P. Joyce 59 Aero-Neurosis: Pilots of the First World War and the Psychological Legacies of Combat By Mark C. Wilkins Review by Steve Agoratus 60 Red Star and Roundel: A Shared Century By Philip Wilkinson Review by Gary Connor 61 The United States Air Force in Britain By Darren Willmin Review by Joseph Romito 62 The Complete History of U.S. Cruise Missiles: From Bug to Snark to Tomahawk By Bill Yenne Review by Todd Riebel 62 Departments President’s Message 4 In Memoriam 6 Upcoming Events 64 New History Mystery 66

COVER: Formation flight of F–35s. The Air Force Historical Foundation

The Journal of the Air Force Historical Foundation Fall 2020 Volume 67 Number 3

Editor Richard I. Wolf

Editor Emeritus Jacob Neufeld

Air Force Historical Foundation Book Review Editor P.O. Box 790 Scott A. Willey Clinton, MD 20735-0790 (301) 736-1959 Advertising Jim Vertenten E-mail: [email protected] On the Web at http://www.afhistory.org Circulation Angela J. Bear Board of Directors President’s Circle Col Wray Johnson, USAF (Ret.) Lt Gen Christopher D. Miller, USAF (Ret.) Lt Col Kenneth W. Sublett, USAF (Ret.) Chairman Lt Gen Nicholas B. Kehoe, USAF (Ret.) Benefactor Air Power History (ISSN 1044-016X) is pro- First Vice Chairman Mr. Darrell Dvorak duced for Spring, Summer, Fall, and Winter by Lt Gen Charles R. Heflebower, USAF (Ret.) Dr. John Farquhar the Air Force Historical Foun dation. Second Vice Chairman Lt Gen Charles R. Heflebower, USAF (Ret) Lt Gen Nicholas B. Kehoe, USAF (Ret) Prospective contributors should consult the Dr. Rebecca Grant, GUIDELINES FOR CONTRIBUTORS at Secretary the back of this journal. Unsolicited manu- Patron Members Lt Col Steven Gress, Jr., USAF (Ret.) scripts will be returned only on specific re- Treasurer Maj Gen Charles J. Dunlap, Jr., USAF quest. The Editor cannot accept responsibility Maj Gen John L. Barry, USAF (Ret) Lt Col Raymond Fredette, USAF (Ret.) for any damage to or loss of the manuscript. Douglas Birkey Dr. Jerome V. Martin The Editor reserves the right to edit manu- Col Scott C. Bishop, USAF (Ret.) Lt Gen George D. Miller, USAF (Ret.) scripts and letters. Col Christopher J. Brunner, USAF (Ret) Brig Gen Jon A. Reynolds, USAF (Ret.) Gen Ralph E. Eberhart, USAF (Ret.) Brig Gen William L. Shields, USAF (Ret) Address LETTERS and manuscripts to: Lt Gen Robert J. Elder, USAF (Ret.) Brig Gen Wade R. Smith Maj Gen Charles W. Lyon, USAF (Ret.) Mr John Terino Air Power History Col Stephen E. Newbold, USAF (Ret.) 3043 Sunny Ridge Drive MSgt Keith A. Reed, USAF (Ret.) Donations Odenton, MD 21113 Mr. Frank Alfter e-mail: [email protected] Col Terry Balven, USAF (Ret.) Correspondence regarding missed issues or Emeritus Eileen Bjorkman Gen Michael J. Dugan, USAF (Ret.) changes of address should be addressed to Maj Gen Dale W. Meyerrose, USAF (Ret.) the CIRCULATION OFFICE: Chairman Mr. Ned E Derhammer Col Wray Johnson, USAF (Ret.) Air Power History Col Joseph Marston, USAF (Ret.) P.O. Box 790 Editor, Air Power History Lt Gen Christopher D. Miller, USAF (Ret.) Clinton, MD 20735-0790 Richard I. Wolf Col Bobby B. Moorhatch, USAF (Ret.) (301) 736-1959 Lt Gen Michael A. Nelson, USAF (Ret.) e-mail: [email protected] Editor Emeritus, Air Power History Maj Gen John D. Paulk, USAF (Ret.) Dr. L. Parker Temple ADVERTISING Jacob Neufeld Corporate Sponsors Jim Vertenten Boeing P.O. Box 790 Staff Clinton, MD 20735-0790 Calvert Systems Lt Col James A. Vertenten, USAF (Ret.) (301) 736-1959 Secretary to the Board and General Atomics e-mail: [email protected] Executive Director General Electric Aviation Mrs. Angela J. Bear, Office Manager Leidos Copyright © 2020 by the Air Force Historical Lockheed Martin Foundation. All rights reserved. L3Harris Technologies Periodicals postage paid at Clinton, MD Northrop Grumman 20735 and additional mailing offices. Pratt & Whitney Wings over the Rockies Air Museum Postmaster: Please send change of address to the Circulation Office.

2 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 From the Editor

Our issue this time seems to be, if you want to impose a theme on it, all about pre-1950 activities in the Army Air Forces. It wasn’t planned that way, but it does seem to be an area of interest for many of our contributors. Our first article is a lengthy piece from repeat contributor Bill Cahill, with a very inter- esting, story of a little-studied area, interwar air operations in the Hawaiian Islands. Don’t be daunted by its length, it’s worthy of reading. Our second article is by repeat contributor Ken Werrell, who examines the story of Lt. Martin Monti, a defector/turncoat/traitor of late World War II, and makes you ask the ques- tion about what he intended and what did he hope to accomplish? It’s a forgotten saga, but not an unkown phenomenon. Our third article is the first of two personal stories from first-time contributors. This one, from Brian Dillon, is about his father’s World War II experience. It’s always good to get a personal touch. The final article in this issue is by Don Madar and his cousin Jeff Antol, with a story of how their uncle’s plane ride in a B–17 for a little R&R resulted in his tragic death very late in World War II. The President’s Message begins on the next page, and is followed on page 6 by a memo- rial for Gen Thomas Moorman, who recently passed away. Don’t miss Upcoming Events on page 64, although I fear you must take all dates in that section as still uncertain at this point. If you see something scheduled, be sure to check with the organization sponsoring the event to ensure it will take place. It’s a most uncertain world today. And the closing story is this issue’s Mystery. Enjoy!

Air Power History and the Air Force Historical Foundation disclaim responsibility for statements, either of fact or of opinion, made by contributors. The submission of an article, book review, or other commu- nication with the intention that it be published in this journal shall be construed as prima facie evi- dence that the contributor willingly transfers the copyright to Air Power History and the Air Force Historical Foundation, which will, however, freely grant authors the right to reprint their own works, if published in the authors’ own works.

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 3 From the President President’s Message

Dear Members,

To Foundation members and all Airpower History readers, I again join other AFHF leaders in wishing you and your loved ones good health and good spirits as the world works to overcome challenges and regain normalcy. Over the last few months, the AFHF has not been immune to the COVID-19 pandemic’s impact. Despite this, air and space power history continues to be made, dedicated historians continue to document and interpret it, and the Foundation—and growing numbers of loyal members—continue to value and support our mission to know the past and shape the future.

Among other disruptions, our annual membership meeting and luncheon has been postponed since May to avoid unnecessary risk to members and participants. Given extant public health guidelines, our current intent is to replicate that meeting via virtual technology before the end of this year, although we will miss the collegiality of a physical gathering and a good meal.

In addition to postponing our annual meeting, ongoing travel and meeting challenges make it sensible to waive the Bylaws term limits for current Foundation Directors, facilitating Board continuity and our ability to recruit into the coming year. We will soon conduct voting to elect new, and confirm previously appointed, board members both online at our website and by mail (per normal AFHF procedures). When seated, the Board will continue to assess the need to adjust our battle rhythm and we will put any significant changes to the membership as required.

Pandemic uncertainty also necessitates changes to the Foundation’s signature Awards pre- sentations and banquet this Fall, in contrast to last year’s very successful events when we pre- sented the Doolittle Award to the 55th Wing at the Air Force Memorial, then hosted over 160 people for a banquet featuring Chief of Staff General David Goldfein, who introduced our Spaatz Award winner, General John Jumper. Tremendously generous support by corporate partners made this our largest fundraising success in recent years. Unfortunately, a similar gathering is simply not an option in the near term. Foundation leadership will continue to evaluate health and travel constraints and make a decision in the coming months on the timing, venue, and mode—virtual or physical—that best balances the well-being of potential attendees and ensuring our awards are fitting and memorable for all involved.

4 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 We continue the Foundation’s efforts to document American air and space power in the form of two potential book projects, one specifically designed to coincide with the Air Force’s 75th an- niversary, and another adding to our series of chronicles covering the full span of Air Force his- tory. We will be moving forward briskly on the 75th Anniversary book—so look for an opportunity to participate in the coming weeks on afhistory.org. The Board continues to consider the best for- mat, timing, and content through which AFHF should fulfill its charter of chronicling Air Force history and celebrating Air Force heritage. As the Department of the Air Force plans to celebrate its 75th year, this is a pivotal time for the Air Force Historical Foundation to push up the throttles and enhance our impact. CSAF Gen C.Q. Brown has said the Air Force must “accelerate change or lose;” Chief of Space Operations Gen Jay Raymond has noted we are “on the cusp of a tectonic shift in warfare.” Both are reminders that AFHF has documented decades of innovation by Air- men—we must continue to record, assess, share, and innovate, just as today’s air and space pro- fessionals are doing.

Air Power History remains a preeminent reflection on airpower history—and reinforcing APH, our outreach via social media continues its steady growth. We continue to gain active recipients for daily “This Day in Air Force History” emails (please continue to forward to anyone interested), increased our following on Twitter by nearly 10 percent, and we routinely see nearly 8,000 Face- book followers for each AFHF post. Our JSTOR archives have been accessed frequently during the last few months, reflecting increased interest from various students of airpower history. All of these have contributed to a Membership increase in our Associate (online) category.

Finally, I leave you with a serious request: this is a time for all of us to be introspective, to be forward-looking, and to be bold. Our nation faces increasing challenges from historical competi- tors and from the very pace of change across the globe. These trends are rendering physical bor- ders less meaningful and making the famous OODA loop a matter of microseconds rather than minutes in air and space combat, even as the time required to evolve immensely complex systems begins to exceed our reliable ability to detect and decide on the need for such change. In this en- vironment, America’s history remains a relevant source of insight on technologies and the amaz- ing men and women who are our nation’s warriors. We have a role to play. Hence my request: if you have ideas for what AFHF can do differently or better, now is the time to share. I earnestly welcome your thoughts by email to [email protected]. Thank you for your continued sup- port in every way.

With best regards,

Christopher D. Miller, USAF (Ret.) President and Chairman of the Board

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 5 In Memoriam

Thomas S. Moorman 1940-2020

General Thomas S. Moorman, Jr., USAF (Ret.) died June 18, 2020, at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md. He was born at Walter Reed Medical Center on November 16, 1940 to Thomas S. Moorman and Miss Atha G. Moorman. Tom was a wonderful fa- ther and family man, and a friend to many who he mentored and guided through life's circumstances. Tom began a distinguished 35-year Air Force career after graduating from Dartmouth College in 1962. He served as an intelligence officer with a B-47 bombard- ment wing, the Director of the Office of Space Systems, Vice Commander of the 1st Space Wing, several staff positions at Air Force Space Command, and numerous operational and staff positions in space, aircraft recon- naissance and intelligence units. In 1987, Tom became Director of Space and Strate- gic Defense Initiative Programs where he directed the development and procurement of satellites, launch ve- hicles, anti-satellite weapons, strategic radars and space command centers. From 1990 to 1994, he served as vice commander and commander of Air Force Space Command, responsible for the operation of the Air Force space systems, space surveillance radars, and the ICBM force. Tom's last military assignment was as Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force. From July 1994 until his retirement in August 1997, he oversaw and managed the day-to-day activities of the Air Staff, chaired the Air Force Council, and was the Air Force representative to joint and interagency organizations, including the JROC and Quadrennial Defense Review. After retirement, he served until 2008 as senior executive advisor and partner with Booz Allen Hamilton, responsible for the firm's Air Force and NASA business. Tom remained engaged with nu- merous boards and studies, including the congressionally directed Space Commission. He also served on space-related studies and task forces on behalf of the Department of Defense, U.S. intelligence community, and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. Tom is survived by his loving family, including wife of 54 years, Barbara Stadler Moorman; son, Thomas S. Moorman, III of Alexandria, VA.; son, John R. Moorman and daughter-in-law, Amy, and cherished granddaughter, Elizabeth Jane of Alexandria, VA. He is also survived by his brother, Robert W. Moorman and sister-in-law, Beth Moorman of Colorado Springs, CO; his brother-in-law Serge Demchuk of Virginia Beach, VA; as well as his many nieces, nephews, grandnieces and grand- nephews across the country. Tom is predeceased by his sisters, Margaret M. Demchuck and Allyn M. Sullivan. An inurnment at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia will be held at a future date.

6 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 Foundation of Pacific Air War Strategy: Interwar Hawaii Air Operations

Thomas Morse MB–3A fighter crashed at Wheeler Field, circa 1926. In its first year of service in Hawaii, 40 percent of the assigned MB–3A crashed and went onto their back as William Cahill depicted – crushing the reserve fuel tank which caused maintenance issues due to a lack of spare tanks in Hawaii.

he Air Service and Air Corps units assigned to the Hawaiian Department prior to the Second World War were a Petri dish for air power experiments. Over a three decade period, the tropical airmen evolved from acting as a T supporting adjunct to ground forces to becoming a genuine ‘air force’ with stand-alone reconnaissance and strike capabilities. Given the economic privations of the Great Depression, this transformation was not only unexpected—but it proved critical in ultimately forming the doctrinal basis for future air power operations in the Pacific.

A Slow Start

Aircraft were still an unknown quantity for the Signal Corps in the 1910s. Air stations were established in the United States both to train pilots and to understand how this new capability could be integrated with Army operations. On June 29, 1913, Lt Harold Geiger and twelve enlisted men set out from San Diego, California to establish an air station in Hawaii. Equipped with two used seaplanes, a Curtiss E and a Curtiss G, the unit arrived at Honolulu on July 13 and was ordered to Schofield Barracks, Oahu, the main army base in Hawaii located to the north of Pearl Harbor. After surveying the area for a suitable airfield, Lt Geiger settled on Fort Kamehameha, a coast artillery installation at the mouth of Pearl Harbor. Though the site was not a perfect fit for seaplane operations, Geiger persisted and flew his first flight on August 8, 1913. A few flights were undertaken over the next couple months but flight operations were limited by unreliable aircraft and a Hawaiian Department commander who would not sanction regular flying instruction or participation in department maneuvers. As a consequence, both aircraft were put into storage on November 25. Though maintenance was done on one of the aircraft in June 1914, Lt Geiger and his men returned to the States in August 1914 and both aircraft were sold on November 12, 1914.1 While Lt Geiger’s experiences on Oahu were underwhelming, a similar detachment in the Philippines was having greater success at demonstrating the utility of aviation to overseas forces. Tests conducted with seaplanes on Manila Bay in the Philippines proved the utility of aircraft in support of the coast defense mission and the Army decided to take the next step forward. On April 9, 1915, the Signal Corps directed that after an aero squadron had been established at San Antonio, it would organize three companies for service overseas in the Philippine Department, the Hawaiian Department, and the Canal Zone. The Philippine and Hawaiian companies were to be equipped solely with seaplanes and were not to have any motor vehicles assigned. 2 Though the 1st Company, 2nd Aero Squadron was operating in the Philippines by May 1916, flight operations in

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 7 A Martin B–12 likely assigned to the 23rd Bombardment Squadron flying near mountainous terrain with pilot's canopy cranked open. The B–12 dif- fered from the more familiar B–10 by having flotation chambers for safety on overwater flights and being fitted with Pratt & Whitney R-1690-11 radial engines in place of the B–10’s Wright R-1820-31 engines.

Hawaii and Panama lagged behind. It was not until late 1919, the field was named Luke Field in honor of Great 1916 that the 6th Aero Squadron was organized at San An- War Air Service ace Lt Frank Luke. Expansion continued tonio. On February 15, 1917, Capt John Curry arrived at over the next few years, with additional hangars, barracks, Honolulu to establish the 6th Aero Squadron in the islands and ancillary structures being constructed.3 and develop a seaplane base for squadron operations. Capt While Washington was wrangling over ownership of John Brooks and the rest of the squadron arrived from San Ford Island, the 6th Aero started flight operations from the Diego on March 13, 1917. While the squadron was tem- beach of Fort Kamehameha with its two assigned Curtiss porarily established at Fort Kamehameha, Curry, by then N–9 seaplanes but it was soon apparent that the aircraft appointed as commander of the 6th Aero, surveyed for a were insufficient to meet all department needs. 4 In Janu- more permanent location and settled on Ford Island in the ary 1918, 6th Aero commanding officer Major Clark wrote center of Pearl Harbor. A Joint Army and Navy Board on his superiors in the States asking for a Curtiss R–4 “land Aeronautic Cognizance agreed as well and recommended machine” for advanced flying in order to stay current on the island be purchased for joint use as an aviation station aircraft “in use on the battle fronts.” Washington promised in Hawaii, with the Army occupying the land along the to provide a suitable machine when available.5 northwest coast and the Navy along the southwest coast. In the meantime, the two N–9 seaplanes were aug- After agreements were drawn up in Washington, the land mented with three Curtiss HS–1L flying boats in 1918.6 was finally purchased on June 21, 1918, the Army and With this small group of aircraft, the 6th Aero got to work. Navy splitting the cost. On September 25, 1918, the 6th By mid-1918, the squadron was flying from Oahu to the Aero Squadron moved from Fort Kamehameha to Ford Is- other islands in the Hawaiian chain with its Curtiss N–9 land. Ford Island’s initial facilities consisted of two double seaplanes. In September 1918, the squadron was asked to seaplane hangars, two land plane hangars, a small repair help with spotting fire for coast artillery guns. Using the shop and a supply warehouse. Soon a small airstrip was two N–9s, the aircraft crudely communicated to the gun cleared on the center of the island, but it would be another batteries using throttle movements of an un-mufflered en- year before personnel quarters were added. On April 30, gine to send Morse code. Follow-on tests in November used a modified civilian wireless set that proved the utility of William Cahill is a retired Air Force intelligence offi- using an aircraft to aid the firing of coast artillery guns in 7 cer who contracts for DoD in the Washington D.C. Hawaii. In June 1919, Chief of Training and Operations area. An Intelligence Weapons Officer with squadron Group Brigadier General (BG) William Mitchell directed and wing-level experience, he has also served on the the Hawaiian Department Air Service Officer to investi- Air Staff and in an inter-agency capacity outside of gate spotting for coast artillery using radios for targets 8 DoD. Mr. Cahill is a graduate of San Jose State Uni- both within visible range and targets over the horizon. versity and has MS degrees from Embry Riddle Aero- nautical University and the National Defense Post-War Plans Intelligence College. Mr. Cahill has been published in Air Power History, FlyPast, the USAF Weapons Re- A 1917 plan for aircraft for coast defenses of the U.S. view and C4ISR Journal. and overseas possessions outlined the need for three aero squadrons and three balloon companies for Hawaii. The

8 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 final plan put forth in 1919, was for two squadrons (4th Hawaii. The two squadrons allocated to the Hawaiian De- and 6th Observation Squadrons) to be allocated to Hawaii. partment were authorized thirty-eight DH–4s with 100 Both squadrons would be under the 2nd Observation percent reserves, but the DH–4 rebuild delayed the full al- Group, with an attached Photo Section and two balloon location of aircraft. Instead of a homogenous set of aircraft, companies. The 2nd Observation Group was organized in by the end of 1919 the 2nd Observation Group had one September 1919 by the commanding general, Hawaiian HS–1L, two HS–2L, six JN–6HG, three JN–4D, three N– Department.9 On January 24, 1920, ten officers and 120 9, twelve DH–4, and the one Curtiss R–6. Due to slow de- men of the 4th Aero Squadron arrived in Hawaii from livery of re-manufactured DH–4Bs, DH–4s were shipped Hazelhurst Field, New York.10 Overseas Air Service units in their stead to Hawaii, with a total of sixty-four of these such as the 2nd Observation Group fell under a unique outdated aircraft sent to the Department by April 1920.15 dual chain of command. Though the Air Service would pro- In February 1920, the 3rd and 21st Balloon Companies vide guidance on the matters of training and operations, were ordered to Hawaii from Fort Ross, California. By May the local Department Commander would “supervise” the 6, 1920, the 3rd Balloon Company was at Fort Ruger and units as well as control matters relating to supply and dis- the 21st Balloon Company at Fort Shafter, coast artillery cipline. All matters concerning the units would run forts located on the outskirts of Honolulu.16 Fort Shafter through the Department Commanding General except was as interim stop for the 21st Balloon Company as the those “strictly technical.”11 original plan was to base this unit at Fort Kamehameha. In April 1919, BG Mitchell outlined his vision for the In late 1920 construction was started at Fort Kamehameha role of air power in Hawaii to the new Hawaiian Depart- on the twelve buildings for housing a balloon company, in- ment Air Service Officer. Mitchell’s view was that the Air cluding barracks, balloon hangar, and technical buildings.17 Service units providing “proper defenses of the Hawaiian Once these facilities were complete, the 21st Balloon Com- Department” were to fulfill two functions: support land pany moved from its temporary spaces at Fort Shafter to forces in Hawaii and act as an air force capable of defensive its permanent home on October 2, 1920, with construction and independent offensive actions. Though the squadrons work continuing for another year.18 were designated as observation, it was viewed that the air- The Aero Coast Defense Project plans for Hawaii also craft and crews could function in the bombardment role as included funds for the maintenance of Air Service facilities well as pursuit.12 A short-lived plan in 1919, would have in the Hawaiian Department.19 In December 1919, these augmented the two observation squadrons in Hawaii with funds were used to repair and extend the landing field at a pursuit squadron, but the 2nd Observation Group would Luke Field since the flying field was in “no condition for need to wait another two years until this came to fruition. the operation from it.” Luke’s flying field was located in the In early 1919 the 6th Aero completed its move to Ford Is- center of Ford Island and was a joint-use landing strip for land, removing its “shorehouse and garage” from Fort both Army and Navy flight activity. By December 1920, Kamehameha and setting up a landing field capable of op- work had begun on the erection of permanent buildings at erating DH–4 and JN–4 aircraft. Equipment for the soon- Luke Field. Foundations were completed on three large to-be 2nd Observation Group was slowly tricking into storehouses and framing constructed for ten sets of officers’ Oahu. The original plan for the 6th Aero Squadron was for quarters.20 Early on, sharing of Ford Island was not seen it to be equipped with four N–9 seaplanes, nine HS–2L fly- as ideal and any growth in unit size beyond two squadrons ing boats, nine DH–4 bombers, and six JN–4HG and three would require an additional air base, likely at Schofield JN–4D trainer aircraft, with one third of these being kept Barracks.21 Though not an ideal location, the Air Service in reserve. In March 1919 eight DH–4 bombers and six maintained its presence on Ford Island for the present be- HS–2L flying boats were enroute to the 6th Aero, accom- cause of its proximity to coast artillery, the primary pur- panied by six months of spare parts and twelve spare en- pose of the 2nd Observation Group. gines.13 When the expansion of Air Service presence in Aircraft continued to trickle in, with twelve Curtiss Hawaii to two squadrons was approved, Director of Mili- JN–6HG-1 aircraft shipped from Rockwell Air Intermedi- tary Aeronautics Brig Gen Mitchell recommended sending ate Depot in San Diego on February 7, 1920 and the initial additional personnel and sufficient equipment for two DH– 25 DH–4B aircraft and material for lighter than air flight 4 squadrons with 80 percent replacement “as soon as pos- arriving on June 2, 1920.22 The JN–6HG-1 dual control sible.” Sixty DH–4 aircraft were crated and sitting at the trainers were in lieu of a request sent in December 1919 Army Dock in New York City awaiting shipment to Hawaii for twelve Vought VE–7 dual control aircraft to aid in train- when Mitchell directed the cancellation of this shipment ing DH–4 pilots. Also arriving in mid-1920, were three and its replacement with updated DH–4B bombers.14 Fokker D.VII aircraft acquired as reparations after the Between 1919 and 1923, the Air Service contracted to Great War, likely sent for 2nd Observation Group pilots to have 1,538 DH–4s remanufactured into DH–4Bs by mov- maintain competence in acrobatics in preparation for the ing the pilot’s seat back and the gas tank forward, correct- stand up of a pursuit squadron.23 The influx of JN–6HG ing the most serious problems in the DH–4 design. Of aircraft allowed the earlier JN–4D aircraft to be retired by these, 100 were allotted to the Hawaii with a further re- July 1920. Ten HS–2L aircraft that arrived at Ford Island serve of fifty, but the first group of twenty five DH–4Bs did on October 15, 1920, were received in a “more or less dam- not arrive until June 2, 1920. Machinations from Washing- aged condition” and put into reserve for refurbishment and ton notwithstanding, aircraft continued to trickle into future use.24 A final installment of fifteen DH–4B aircraft

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 9 arrived on December 18, 1920. The only additional aircraft vision, split between patrol, reconnaissance, and artillery to arrive over the next 18 months were three DH–4B for observation though the 2nd Observation Group airmen the squadrons and one DH–4-BP–1 aircraft that was as- were able to slip in a few attack and ‘bombing formation’ signed to the new 11th Photo Section.25 missions.33 In a nod towards Mitchell’s original vision for The airmen of the 2nd Observation Group continued air power in Hawaii, the 2nd Observation Group estab- to expand the mission of the Air Service in the islands. The lished a bombing course based on training from the Great 6th Aero started work with the Hawaiian Division, search- War. Curriculum was developed and a bombing range set ing for operating fields in early October 1919 in order to up near Schofield Barracks for training use by DH–4s fitted support planned department maneuvers starting on Octo- with bomb racks.34 The training of airmen had progressed ber 15.26 This airfield survey work continued after the ma- to a point that by the week of June 11, 1921, the Luke Field neuvers and would become a regular activity of the units could fly a combined group attack mission with two Hawaiian air force in 1919 and 1920. These trips served squadron formations of six aircraft each.35 one of two functions: familiarization of pilots with the dif- ferent islands of Hawaii and surveys of new airfields or Names Change but the Mission Continues emergency landing fields. Though many of the over water flights to distant islands were done with HS–2L seaplanes, As the Air Service evolved after the Great War, unit DH–4 aircraft did venture from Oahu to the neighboring designations started to change to better reflect the inde- island of Molokai on at least two occasions. Flight activity pendence of the air units. In March 1921 the 4th and 6th of the 2nd Observation Group in 1920 averaged 60-70 Aero Squadrons were re-designated 4th and 6th flights per week, totaling 30-45 flight hours.27 While some Squadrons (Observation) and on April 12, 1921, the 2nd of these hours were expended in flights to explore the is- Observation Group became the 5th Group (Observation) lands or routine training, others were put towards working and was authorized to form Air Park No. 10.36 The Balloon with other Army components on Oahu. Companies had similarly been redesignated Balloon Com- In early 1920 the 2nd Observation Group added a pany (Coast Defense). The 5th Observation was nearing its course on artillery adjustment to their Curriculum of Unit authorized strength, as the year prior the 11th Photo Sec- School. All pilots and observers took the course, though a tion, consisting of Lieutenant Weddington and eleven air- shortage in observers in the group was causing pilots to men, had arrived on Oahu.37 In late 1921, the 19th take training to act as observers for artillery cooperation Squadron (Pursuit) and 23rd Squadron (Bombardment) missions.28 Group pilots conducted the first in a series of were in the process of organization at March Field, Cali- coast artillery adjustment exercises on April 6, 1920, with fornia with a plan to move to Hawaii in April 1922.38 Battery Barri, Fort Kamehameha using a DH–4 to adjust Other missions notwithstanding, the original reason fire via radio and ground panel communication. The group for having aircraft in Hawaii—coast artillery—still occu- continued to work with Battery Barri on a weekly basis pied a fair amount of time. In early September 1921, the into July 1920.29 Based on this experience, 2nd Observation Hawaiian coast artillery units opened their annual target Group Liaison Officer Lt Johnston toured the island’s coast practice season. The Balloon Company (Coast Defense) No. artillery forts to politic for coast artillerymen from each 21 and the 4th and 6th Squadrons (Observation) worked station to be trained on communicating with aircraft, re- with the four long range batteries assigned to Fort Kame- lieving the Group from having to send details of airmen to hameha throughout September while the Balloon Com- the batteries for each shoot.30 A DH–4B fitted with both pany (Coast Defense) No. 3 worked with gun batteries at SCR–73 transmitter and SCR–59 receiver was also used Forts Ruger and DeRussy. The Balloon Company (Coast to adjust coast artillery fire, an improvement over the DH– Defense) Number 21 was starting to refine its tactics for 4 which only had a transmitter and had to receive ground working with guns, developing a new plotting board for messages via ground panel.31 balloon use that could be operated by one man who com- The 2nd Observation Group also worked with infantry municated with the observer in the balloon. Most of the units of the Hawaiian Division. Infantry contact missions plotting work was still done by the coast artillerymen who were a relic of the Great War and involved aircraft flying were loathe to enable airmen to support firing beyond the along the front lines in order to track advancing friendly visual range of their terrestrial observation stations. The units and relay their location and any messages back to the balloon airmen had also become quite proficient maneu- Division Headquarters. Infantry contact flying practice vering inflated balloons, taking only fifteen minutes to started in late May 1920 and continued through July move from the balloon field at Fort Kamehameha to posi- 1920.32 This training was put to use in the Hawaiian De- tions behind the gun battery and even towing an inflated partment war games conducted over a ten day period in captive balloon the twenty miles from Schofield Barracks October 1920. Air Service support to the war games fea- to Fort Shafter. Balloon Company (Coast Defense) Number tured unit aircraft performing aerial patrols, ground attack, 3 had even shifted a balloon from Fort Ruger via road reconnaissance, infantry contact, and artillery spotting through the city of Honolulu to Fort DeRussy and back against the enemy (White) forces. Most support came from again over the course of three days.39 the DH–4, though HS–2L flying boats with two-way radios The Coast Artillery units also worked with the 5th assisted with four days of coast artillery firing. A total of Group to develop ways to defend Hawaii’s shores from 103 flight hours were flown in support of the Hawaiian Di- enemy amphibious forces. Coordination was done with the

10 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 A Boeing DH–4M-1 aircraft parked on a grass field in Hawaii circa 1926-27. The DH–4M aircraft started to arrive in Hawaii in 1926, essentially a re-man- ufactured DH–4B with a new steel tube fuselage. The last DH–4 variant would serve until 1930 before being replaced by more modern types.

64th Coast Artillery (Anti-Aircraft [AA]) Regiment to sup- 5th Group. Since Hawaii was far from the supply depots in port night attacks on hostile landing parties.40 Training the U.S. and required a week’s shipping by naval transport, was done one night in mid-October 1921 with 64th Coast the War Department deemed it wise to store the Hawaiian Artillery (AA) searchlights locating floating barrel targets Department’s wartime reserve on Oahu. In May 1922, an and illuminating them for aerial attack. DH–4s performed additional 123 DH–4B aircraft arrived in Hawaii in for diving attacks on the lit targets and also attacked targets storage as this emergency stockpile. The Hawaiian Depart- illuminated with parachute flares dropped from their own ment received permission from Washington to substitute aircraft. Training of this type continued the following Feb- used DH–4 and DH–4B aircraft for forty-one new DH–4B ruary. Additional maritime bombing training was done off aircraft, leaving eighty-two new aircraft in wartime re- the coast of Oahu, with a new sea target being installed off serve, the number called out in the Air Annex to the Project Barber’s Point. The 5th Group even flew a simulated night for the Defense of Oahu. Washington conceded to this ac- attack against ships in the Middle Loch of Pearl Harbor. 41 tion by acknowledging that the design of aircraft was pro- In order to complete the organization of the Hawaiian gressing so rapidly that the new DH–4B aircraft would Division, the 4th Squadron (Observation) and the 11th become obsolete should an emergency arise even in a rea- Photo Section were assigned to Schofield Barracks and sonable length of time and that long-term storage in the designated as ‘Divisional Air Service’ under command of tropic environment would cause the aircraft to deteriorate Major George E. Stratemeyer. On February 6, 1922, the anyway.44 The fears on tropical storage proved well units moved from Luke Field to Schofield Barracks. The founded, for when 114 wartime reserve DH–4 aircraft were new flying field was previously a cavalry drill field and had inspected in 1925, ninety-three were condemned on the sufficient space for permanent structures, though canvas spot.45 hangar tents were initially used. The departure of the 4th As new DH–4Bs arrived in Hawaii, existing DH–4s Squadron also opened up space at Luke Field for the ar- were dismantled and kept as a source of spares for the rival of the 23rd Squadron, which reached Honolulu on DH–4Bs. By 1923, Hawaii was down to thirty-six DH–4 March 29, 1922, and was assigned to Luke Field. By May airframes. The DH–4B itself was getting old by this date 1922, the 5th Group (Observation) was re-designated the as well, as later that year the Hawaiian Department 5th Group (Composite) and consisted of the 6th Squadron turned in thirty-six DH–4 and DH–4B aircraft for ship- [re-designated from (Observation) to (Pursuit)], the 23rd ment to the U.S. for conversion by Boeing to the updated Squadron (Bombardment), and Air Park Number 10. The steel tube fuselage DH–4M.46 Fortunately, something other 19th Squadron (Pursuit), destined for Hawaii, was still than DH–4s was finally enroute across the Pacific. forming up and training at March Field.42 With new units Thirty Five LWF-manufactured Martin NBS–1 forming, old units were also disappearing. Determined to bombers were allotted to Hawaii, later reduced to twenty be of questionable value to the newly emerging concept of with two having dual controls. An initial group of sixteen air power, the balloon companies in the Philippines and was shipped in February 1923, with the final four being al- Hawaii were ordered demobilized on July 24, 1922.43 located as reserves and not shipping until June 1924. Also The DH–4 still continued to figure prominently in the arriving in Hawaii around this time were two Loening S–

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 11 The crowded pre-war flight line of Wheeler Field, likely taken in mid to late 1939. Aircraft lineup starts with a Martin B–12, followed by two possible North American BC–1s, two Douglas BT–2 instrument trainers and approximately fifteen P–36As.

1 Air Yacht flying boats. To round out the new set of air- Division Maneuvers at Schofield Barracks and that sum- frames in the department was the first dedicated pursuit mer observed fire for each of the battalions of the three aircraft for Hawaii, the Boeing MB–3A. The MB–3A was field artillery regiments during annual tactical inspections an improvement over the Thomas-Morse MB–3, the design as well as spent a week working with the 55th Coast Ar- changes addressing some of the structural design flaws as- tillery Regiment. Supporting the 64th Coast Artillery (AA) sociated with the original aircraft. The Air Service distrib- was not the sole purview of the 4th Observation, though; uted its 200 MB–3As to the 1st Pursuit Group at Selfridge in April through July 1924, the 23rd and 72nd Bombard- Field and the overseas pursuit squadrons in the Philip- ment Squadrons made two Martin bombers available for pines, Hawaii and the Canal Zone. Twenty-four MB–3A daily target towing support over Fort Shafter.51 By 1925 aircraft were shipped to Hawaii in 1923 along with five the 5th Group was also providing aircraft as targets for JN–6HG-1 and three Eberhart SE–5E advanced training 64th Coast Artillery (AA) searchlight crews to practice aircraft. An additional three MB–3A and four SE–5E train- tracking.52 ers were shipped to Hawaii in 1924 along with one DH–4- Target flights aside, the bombardment squadrons did BP–1 survey aircraft. 47 get to train for their primary function. In March 1924 the The Schofield Barracks airfield, named Wheeler Field squadrons dropped 350 bombs for a joint Coast Artillery on November 11, 1922, in honor of Major Sheldon H. and Air Service Board appointed to investigate the com- Wheeler, former commander of Luke Field, slowly grew parative accuracies of bombing and long range firing and over time. By June 30, 1923, ten shop and storage hangars also practiced bombing ships in harbors as targets of op- and four oil and gas storage tanks were complete.48 Also portunity. Their pursuit brethren practiced combat maneu- emerging at Wheeler was the 17th Composite Group which vers, dive bombing, aerial gunnery and acrobatics but only stood up on May 1, 1923 along with the 19th Squadron in daylight hours. The common thread between all the (Pursuit). On the same day the 72nd Squadron (Bombard- Hawaii-assigned units was inter-island flying. On at least ment) stood up at Luke Field. Sometime in 1923 the a monthly basis, if not more frequently, formations of Mar- clumsy nomenclature of “squadron (pursuit)” was replaced tin bombers would fly to the islands of Maui, Molokai, by “pursuit squadron.” On January 15, 1924, the 17th Lanai and Hawaii. The 4th Observation would fly similar Group was dis-established and the 19th Pursuit trans- missions with its DH–4s as did the pursuit squadrons, ferred to Luke Field with its six MB–3A and one SE–5E though they would often have a DH–4 ‘radio ship’ or Mar- aircraft.49 Once at Luke, it was brought up to full strength tin bomber escort. One of the more frequent destinations, of twelve MB–3As and three SE–5Es and in April 1924, the airfield at Lanai, was planned for use as a base of op- 1Lt Claire Chennault took command of squadron, one of erations to protect the island of Hawaii, 100 miles further many soon to be famous aviators who served in Hawaii.50 distant.53 4th Observation Squadron was once again the sole oc- cupant of Wheeler Field and continued in its role as the The Emergence of Air Power Missions primary air component working with ground forces. To support this mission, squadron personnel established sep- In mid-1924 the 5th Group changed their focus from arate schools for working with coast and division artillery. inter-island flights to attack and patrolling missions in In March 1924, the 4th Observation took part in Hawaiian preparation for the Hawaiian Department exercise in Sep-

12 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 tember 1924. One training mission saw a flight of Martin Navy was to use the exercise as an example of why coast bombers escorted by three flights of MB–3As fly out to at- protection should be turned over to the Navy and naval tack a notional enemy fleet of battleships and aircraft car- aviation. Hawaiian airmen felt every effort was made by riers. For the exercise, the 6th and 19th Pursuit were the Navy to discourage Army over water reconnaissance detailed to protect Oahu with two patrols of three aircraft, but that did not stop the Hawaii-based units from carrying one stationed five miles south of Diamond Head and one out an aggressive program to include night operations. five miles north of Makapu’u Point. A formation of four The purpose of Hawaii’s Army-Navy maneuvers was to DH–4s were flown in the Kaiwi Channel between Oahu test plans for the defense of Oahu and train Army and and Molokai to report via radio any inbound attacking air- Navy personnel in joint operations. The exercise scenario craft to enable launching of pursuit aircraft. The bomber had the U.S. (Blue) capturing Hawaii from an adversary squadrons flew in the adversary role, with three Martin (Black) to make a naval base out of it. The Blue Fleet, in- bombers flying to Molokai and returning for a simulated cluding the aircraft carrier USS Langley and accompanied attack on Luke Field as well as flying night bombing mis- 1,500 Marines (representing two divisions for the exercise), sions.54 After the exercise was completed, a gasoline short- left San Francisco on April 15. The Navy provided addi- age curtailed most flying for the 5th Group. Flight hours tional assets to augment the Black forces in Hawaii includ- for October 1924 were barely half of those flown in Sep- ing twenty-six scouting and torpedo planes.60 The exercise tember.55 started on April 25, and saw Black forces, in the form of Though night flying had been going on for years, it was Army and Navy aircraft, concentrated on Oahu except not until October 1924 that the Fairfield Air Depot shipped seven 4th Observation DH–4Bs deployed to Lanai. The re- equipment to properly equip eighteen NBS–1 and eight mainder of the 4th Observation and most of the 5th Group DH–4B aircraft for night flying.56 By May 1925 the NBS– conducted “vertical defense” of the Hawaiian Islands, with 1 bombers were concentrated in the 23rd Bombardment 4th Observation DH–4Bs playing the role of fighters. The Squadron, with the 72nd Bombardment Squadron and 4th exercise also featured an Air Intelligence and Message Cen- Observation Squadron still operating DH–4Bs. The pursuit ter co-located with 64th Coast Artillery (AA), hinting at an squadrons operated a few DH–4Bs and SE–5Es in addition integrated air defense of Oahu. On the first day of the ex- to their eleven assigned MB–3As while the 11th Photo Sec- ercise, the Blue forces were able to brush aside the 4th Ob- tion operated the department’s lone DH–4-BP. All these servation’s deployed DH–4Bs and land Marines to secure aircraft were used not only in exercises and training, but Molokai and Lanai. USS Langley dispatched her aircraft also in a publicity role that became part of Hawaiian De- to landing fields on the two islands and the Blue fleet con- partment tradition, so-called “Aloha Flights” and Division tinued towards Oahu. Black patrols flown by Oahu-based Reviews. Starting in the early 1920s the Hawaiian air force Air Service aircraft soon located portions of the Blue fleet. would fly “Aloha flights” to greet the bi-weekly inbound An attack on the Blue Scouting Fleet in a severe rain storm Army Transport from San Francisco. Whenever a distin- resulted in complete surprise and was considered success- guished visitor was in town, the entire Hawaii Division ful. Though the Blue Main Fleet was discovered, it was out- would turn out for a review on the parade ground, an event side of striking range and while it could have been attacked accompanied by a mass fly-over of 5th Group aircraft. later, night attacks were not authorized for the maneuvers These events would continue into the 1930s. due to safety. The following morning, April 27, the Blue The clear delineation of roles between the Army and forces launched their main attack against the north coast Navy air services with respect to aerial defense of the coast of Oahu and the exercise concluded.61 lines was still undefined in the mid-1920s. In June 1924, Exercises aside, the daily grind of Hawaiian flight op- all Army Corps Area and overseas departments were di- erations slowly whittled down the pool of available aircraft. rected to ensure a “competent Air Service officer” was made The 5th Group pursuit squadrons were having a hard time a member of the local joint planning committee.57 This nas- maintaining flight operations with their MB–3A aircraft, cent inter-service rivalry was readily apparent in Hawaii. having no replacements for the reserve fuel tanks which The Air Service was very interested in presenting its best were crushed every time the aircraft went on its back – capabilities in front of the Navy for the Joint Army-Navy which 40 percent of the aircraft did in the first year of serv- Maneuvers planned for April 1925. In June 1924, Chief of ice in Hawaii.62 The Air Service shipped an additional six the Air Service Maj. Gen. Mason Patrick wrote the Com- aircraft to Hawaii in early 1925, to keep the overseas sta- manding General of the Hawaiian Department promising tions fully stocked with their allotted numbers, with an- “proper quantities” of the “latest authorized equipment” in other twenty-one scheduled for delivery after overhaul. order to ensure that “the most accurate conception” regard- These aircraft were desperately needed on Oahu, for by ing the possibilities and limitations of air power could be March 1925, Hawaii was thirty-one aircraft below the tar- derived from the maneuvers.58 Included in this equipment get number of MB–3As, only having seventeen of the re- delivery were new SCR 134 and 135 radio sets that were quired forty-eight aircraft.63 The solution lay in new fighter received and installed prior to the start of the exercise. The aircraft, and by the end of the year twelve Boeing PW–9s 5th Group also focused its training, holding four tactical had been shipped. Though the PW–9s were assembled and exercises the month prior to the exercise that were similar sitting on the ramp at Luke Field by March 1926, a short- to what was expected to be done in the upcoming joint ma- age of propellers for the aircraft kept the pursuit squadrons neuvers.59 The Air Service believed the objective of the soldiering on in their MB–3As.64 Nine NBS–1s, twenty one

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 13 DH–4M-1s and one DH–4M-2P were also received in the first part of 1926, finally allowing obsolescent DH–4Bs to be retired.65 The Martins, though, were already being eyed for replacement, with some of the twenty five Keystone LB–5A tagged for shipment to Hawaii by 1928. In April 1926, all units completed their preliminary aerial and ground gunnery tests with record practice in machine gun firing and bombing held in May. Lt Chen- nault of the 19th Pursuit had the high score of 97 percent. Unfortunately, the following month a stuck throttle caused him to roll off the end of the runway when landing his PW– 9, hitting a motorcycle and putting the plane on its nose. Thankfully, Chennault walked away with little more than a bruised ego. In July the 5th Group conducted group-level maneuvers with its squadrons, to include problems in group rendezvous; theoretical bombing attacks on battle fleets, bomb dumps and airfields; and alert and intercep- tion problems. 66 November 1926 was devoted to individual aerial gunnery training. A strip of Waimanalo Military A 26th Attack Squadron Curtiss A–3B parked in front of a hangar at Reservation was allotted to the Air Corps for the fall gun- Wheeler Field. The Air Corps procured seventy-eight of these aircraft, nery season and was made into a ground gunnery range based on the O–1E, from Curtiss with deliveries starting in 1929. The 26th Attack replaced these veteran biplanes with ‘used’ A–12s in 1936. for the bombardment squadrons. 67 This gunnery range would see much use over the next fifteen years, evolving into Bellows Field. Continued Organizational Growth Service tests of two Loening COA–1 Observation Am- phibians were held in Hawaii at Wheeler Field and Pearl Even with the reduced number of aircraft available to Harbor in early 1926.68 Test results proved the utility of the Hawaiian Department, Ford Island was getting having an amphibian observation in Hawaii and the De- crowded with a number of squadrons operating in the lim- partment Air Officer promptly requested that the 4th Ob- ited space. During the 1926 maneuvers, the senior umpire servation be completely equipped with the type.69 The two recommended the pursuit squadrons move to Wheeler COA–1s stayed in Hawaii after completion of the tests as Field. The Air Corps was also concerned about the 4th Ob- a ‘down payment’ until additional aircraft could be as- servation being under the direct control of the Hawaiian signed. The squadron continued its coast artillery spotting Division and wanted to bring it back into the fold of air- work, and the ability to alight on the water provided peace men. On January 10, 1927, orders were received at Luke of mind for the pilots of these types of missions. In August Field relieving 6th and 19th Pursuit from assignment to 1926, three 4th Observation aircraft, one fitted with a the 5th Group and organizing them into a Provisional Pur- radio, made the flight to Molokai and spent three days suit Group stationed at Wheeler Field. The 4th Observa- marking existing airfields and looking for new ones. In Oc- tion moved from Wheeler to rejoin the 5th Composite tober the 5th Group provided two DH–4M aircraft to ac- Group at Luke Field on January 11. On January 20, 1927, company three Martin bombers that rendezvoused with the Provisional Pursuit Group was named the 18th Pursuit three Navy Curtiss F5L flying boats for a flight to Kauai, Group. 73 One of the reasons that the pursuit aircraft left with radio contact being maintained with Luke Field.70 Luke Field was the condition of the landing strip. While The utility of the radio—not only for safety monitoring Wheeler Field had a nicely sodded smooth surface, that at of distance flights but also scouting—had been known for Luke was very rough and not conducive to the lighter pur- years in Hawaii, but by late 1926 very few of the 5th Group suit ships with their higher landing speeds. By October aircraft were actually fitted with radios. On average, only 1927, the condition of the landing strip at Luke Field had 34 percent of the operational fleet carried radio sets to in- reached the point that the Office of the Chief of the Air clude none of the 72nd Bombardment’s DH–4M-1 aircraft Corps was notified that remedial measures were necessary and only two of the 4th Observation’s six DH–4M-1s. The to prevent “possible destruction of equipment.” Funds were Hawaiian Department wrote Washington, asking to bring released, with the War Department seeking reimburse- this number closer to 90 percent.71 Major General Lewis, ment from the Navy for maintaining the joint use field.74 Commanding General of the Hawaiian Department, also The Hawaiian Department aircraft maintenance was took the time to outline the inadequacy of the strength of handled at the squadron level and by the 65th Service aircraft on hand in the island to The Adjutant General of Squadron with some assistance from Supply Base Hon- the Army. Lewis noted a shortage of sixty-seven aircraft, olulu, both components of the original Air Park Number 10 to include thirty pursuit and seventeen bombers. Washing- that had split up sometime prior to 1923. The Supply Base ton responded that the plan was to have in place an addi- offered the ability to store and distribute Air Service sup- tional forty-four aircraft by July 1, 1927, to include twelve plies for local units, but had no facilities for overhaul, repair DH–4M, six COA–1, five NBS–1, and twenty one PW–9.72 or heavy maintenance on aircraft or aero engines. The

14 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 come Hickam Field. The Pursuit Group would be stationed at Luke Field, the Bombardment Group and Air Depot at Hickam Field, and the Composite Group at Wheeler Field. The subsequent Depression would have a dramatic impact on these plans, with their full accomplishment slipping al- most ten years.77 The Depression, though, was still in the future. The 1920s witnessed an excitement about the potential growth of aviation as records were made and broken and airmen were in the headlines on a regular basis. This excitement soon spread to Hawaii, literally winging in to Oahu one summer day. On June 29, 1927, the Trans-Pacific flight with Lt’s Maitland and Hegenberger landed at Wheeler Field in their Fokker C–2. After the Fokker C–2 toured the Douglas B–18 tied down on a concrete parking pad, likely at Hickam Field. The "BE/22" painted on tail denotes the 22nd aircraft of the 5th islands it was turned over to the Hawaiian Department for Bombardment Group. B–18 aircraft started to arrive in Hawaii in Febru- transport use. The 65th Service Squadron fit standard ary 1938, replacing B–12 aircraft in service in the bombardment and re- landing gear as well as seats to replace long range gas connaissance squadrons. tanks. As the C–2 was being fitted out, the 5th Composite Group did its first “airways” flight, a mission out to Upolu Service Squadron could perform some repairs, but was not Point, Hawaii with four DH–4Ms and the DH–4B–P to in- manned nor did Air Service regulations permit it to per- spect airways fields and associated buildings and test a form major overhauls. In 1925, the Air Service started to radio beacon on Maui. On January 30, 1928, an airways investigate what it would take to turn Supply Base Hon- flight was made to Hawaii with the Fokker C–2 to photo- olulu into an Air Intermediate Depot. It was envisioned the graph landing fields on various islands of the Hawaiian 65th Service Squadron would be released from the 5th group.78 The next month the Fokker made another airways Composite Group and combined with the Supply Base and trip back to Hawaii and on February 10, the Fokker flew a “few expert civilians” to form the depot. The impetus for to Hilo, Hawaii with members of the Territorial Aeronau- this change, besides cost savings, was that most of the air- tical Commission to dedicate the new airport.79 The 18th craft in Hawaii were rapidly approaching their flying time Pursuit Group continued flying airways flights through and requiring a major overhaul.75 mid-1928.80 The resulting change appeared in 1927 with the organ- ization of the 65th Service Squadron into the Station Re- Roaring through the Twenties pair Section and Station Supply Section at Luke Field. Ten civilians were brought over from the Rockwell Air Inter- The 4th Observation Squadron continued its relation- mediate Depot, Scott Field and Wright Field as key men ship with both field and coast artillery. In July 1927, the and an additional hangar built at Luke Field for use as squadron worked with the Harbor Defenses of Pearl Har- “aero repair and assembly shop.” By April 1931, the Station bor for two days. In September 1927, the squadron was fly- Repair Section had ninety civilian employees and fifty-one ing five to six sorties each morning, working with field and enlisted airmen. The depot was run by a Shop Superinten- coast artillery as well as conducting reconnaissance train- dent and included Engine Repair, Welding, Sheet Metal, ing. In this time period, there was also considerable flying and Maintenance Departments along with the Machine done in support of the 64th Coast Artillery (AA), both tow- Shop, Aero Repair Shop to include Parachute and Wood- ing targets and acting as targets for searchlight training.81 working Departments, and Final Assembly Shop.76 The Though the 4th Observation was the only unit focused on depot was tasked with assembly of new aircraft, annual supporting ground forces, the pursuit squadrons also as- overhauls of aircraft and engines, technical changes on sisted in working with the Hawaiian Division. In March fielded aircraft, and rebuild of crashed aircraft to include 1928, the 18th Pursuit Group flew eight ground attack mis- manufacturing new parts as required. sions in support of the division and participated in an The 65th Service Squadron wasn’t the only growth “Army and Navy Exercise” held May 14-17.82 The bomber planned for the islands. Under the Air Corps Five Year Pro- squadrons were also not above supporting the ground gram for Hawaii authorized on July 1, 1927, the 18th Com- forces either. On August 1, 1929, the 5th Composite Group posite Wing was to be established on September 1, 1929. was directed to fly tow target missions for the 64th Coast On that same date, the 73rd and 74th Pursuit Squadrons, Artillery (AA) through October 31. There were usually two the 75th and 76th Service Squadrons, the 19th Bombard- day missions flown five days per week with eight night sor- ment Group, and 31st and 32nd Bombardment Squadrons ties per month, all flown by LB–5A aircraft. Since there were to be established. The 50th Observation Squadron were only fourteen pilots within the group at that time, all was to have been established earlier, on January 1, 1929, pilots were trained to fly the missions as the bomb and the 26th Attack Squadron later, on June 1, 1930. $1.7 squadrons only had six assigned pilots. 83 Mostly, though, million was also to be authorized between 1929 and 1932 the Hawaiian units spent time exploring air power roles for construction, with land procured for what was to be- and refining tactics.

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 15 In September and October 1927, the 23rd and 72nd though the different services could operate together, it was Bombardment Squadrons engaged in extensive bombing recommended that additional combined training take training, flying up to thirteen missions per month. Some place.92 Even with successful training being accomplished, of the flights involved bombing a target anchored in the the summer of 1930 was a low point for the Hawaiian air- water near Fort Kamehameha. 84 Besides dropping bombs, men in terms of aircraft. the Martin bombers of the 5th Composite Group were used Due to aging aircraft and an apparent backlog in main- as transports. The 23rd Bombardment Squadron was used tenance work, at one point in August 1930, all three tactical to support two ‘annual field service’ deployments in Octo- squadrons at Luke Field had no bombers and only an odd ber. On October 3, 1927, the 4th Observation sent eight mix of eight aircraft in commission—four DH–4Ms, two DH–4M-1s to Lanai City, Lanai for a one week deployment. OA–1s and two PW–9s. 93 Wheeler Field and the 18th Pur- Seven Martin bombers hauled mechanics and equipment suit Group were doing better, having received eighteen new to the deployed camp. While deployed, the DH–4Ms flew P–12B aircraft from Boeing in June.94 Still, the situation reconnaissance missions against the Islands of Kahoolawe, was critical enough that the Hawaiian Department com- Lanai, Molokai, and Maui. The 72nd Bombardment plained to the Chief of the Air Corps, noting the depart- Squadron did a similar deployment to Molokai the follow- ment operates “old and obsolete equipment” and that one ing week, deploying seven DH–4M-1s that flew simulated bomb squadron and the 4th Observation were still flying bombing raids each day on different islands in the Hawai- DH–4M aircraft. The response from Washington noted that ian.85 Not to be left out, on October 25, the 18th Pursuit ten O–19Bs and eighteen A–3s were shipping over the next Group did a group tactical flight of seventeen PW-9s to four months, with twenty O–19Cs to follow along with two Lanai.86 These activities continued to ingrain the expedi- Sikorsky S–38/C–6A amphibians.95 The C–6A aircraft were tionary nature of life in an archipelago into the airmen of allocated to ask as ‘guard ships’ for over-water inter-island the Hawaiian Department. flights and not transports, even though the transport was In March 1928, three OA–1s were turned over to the halving with the planned retirement of the Fokker C–2 in 4th Observation from the Station Repair Section, with January 1931.96 Bombers arrived as well, with the first three additional to follow. This was part of the full order for LB–6 being assembled and test flown on September 7, Loening amphibians that had been promised back in De- 1930. 97 By November 10, 1930, fifty-five new airplanes had cember 1926—four OA–1Bs had arrived in November 1927 been received at Wheeler and Luke Fields, with another and two OA–1Cs in February 1928. 87 By June 30, 1929, the twelve O–19s and the two C–6As still to deliver by year last of the six radio equipped-amphibians joined the end. By the end of 1930 the DH–4, a fixture in Hawaii for squadron’s four DH–4M-1s for service, primarily focusing the past eleven years, would finally retire. on performing missions with the coast artillery.88 Also join- In August 1930 the 65th Service Squadron, sometimes ing the Hawaiian Department in 1928 were LB–5A referred to as the Hawaiian Air Intermediate Depot, was bombers and a C–1 transport, bringing Hawaii up to its notified that twelve A–3B aircraft were enroute to the full allotment of two transport aircraft. Though nine LB–6 Hawaii. When the 5th Composite Group commander in- bombers were supposed to be dispatched to Hawaii in quired when the 26th Attack Squadron was to be formed, 1929, they would not actually arrive until 1930.89 Washington replied he was authorized to organize the 26th Moving into 1929, 5th Composite Group continued its Attack and the 75th Service Squadrons using over- policy of inter-island training flights. The 4th Observation strength personnel from existing squadrons and unas- flew at least two of these missions in October 1929 and one signed Air Corps personnel in the Hawaiian Department.98 in November.90 Multi-group rendezvous missions also con- Both new units were assigned to the 18th Pursuit Group, tinued to be flown. In April 1930 alone the 5th and 18th with the 26th Attack forming on August 30, with a strength Groups flew five combined missions which helped pilots of eleven aircraft. The four officers assigned to the 26th At- solve rendezvous problems with aircraft of differing speeds. tack, including future Air Force Chief of Staff Lieutenant On May 14 the 18th Pursuit Group flew twenty one PW– Nathan Twining as commander, worked with ninety en- 9s and its Fokker C–2 as escort for a 5th Composite Group listed men transferred from other units to literally build a bombing mission to Hilo, Hawaii. The Pursuit Group squadron from the ground up. Flight training began in landed on the Inter-Island Airways Field at Wailuku, Maui earnest in February 1931, and the following month the unit while the Composite Group continued on to Hawaii, but flew a nine plane formation on a three-day inter-island lost one bomber and two OA–1s in the crossing due to bad flight.99 Also forming up at this time was the 50th Obser- weather. All remaining aircraft returned to Oahu the fol- vation Squadron. On November 1, 1930, the unit was re- lowing day. 91 This training by the Hawaiian airmen stood constituted under Captain Frank Pritchard and was them in good stead for the continued joint training that assigned four O–19B aircraft. 100 was taking place in the Pacific. To accompany the new units, the air infrastructure in A minor Joint Army-Navy Exercise was held June 26- Hawaii received a needed refresh. After a couple years of July 2, 1930. It was conducted in two parts—a Navy prob- planning, the expansion of Wheeler Field was finally un- lem on June 26-27 with tasking controlled by the Navy, and derway by early 1931. Work continued through 1932, with an Army problem on June 30 – July 2 with the Army con- grading of the landing strip and construction of NCO hous- trolling tasking. Missions were relatively standard but did ing, barracks, officers’ quarters and hangars.101 Under the include night flying. The training highlighted the fact that current Air Corps Five Year Program, the 18th Pursuit

16 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 An 18th Pursuit Group P–26 parked on the ramp at Wheeler Field. A large 18th Pursuit Group symbol is painted aft of the cockpit. Three P–26As from the mainland were received by the 18th Pursuit Group on July 14, 1937 for tests to determine their suitability for use in Hawaii’s climate with a further twenty eight arriving the following March. would have two additional pursuit squadrons added, the son with 21st and 22nd Infantry Brigades using two-way 36th and 77th Pursuit Squadrons, expected in early 1932, radios installed in its new O–19Bs as well as practicing low when the new barracks were completed at Wheeler Field. altitude bombing training. Officer exchanges also contin- The same plan also authorized the 19th Bombardment ued, with the squadron hosting both Coast Artillery as well Group, 30th and 32nd Bombardment Squadrons, and 80th as Field Artillery officers for the purpose of understanding Service Squadron.102 Unfortunately, Hawaii did not have Air Corps operations.107 One change to years past was the the facilities to absorb this growth—Luke Field was full addition of two other units to share the burden of support- and Wheeler’s facilities were just starting to be built. Wash- ing the ground forces—the 50th Observation and 26th At- ington decided to keep the units in the U.S. and the 19th tack Squadrons. The 50th Observation started slow, Bombardment Group was eventually formed with the 30th assisting with the target towing missions with the 64th and 32nd Bombardment Squadrons at Rockwell Field, Cal- Coast Artillery (AA). The 26th Attack developed a close re- ifornia in June 1932. Likewise, the pursuit squadrons lationship with the Hawaiian Division from early on. In formed under the 20th Pursuit Group and moved to Barks- 1931 the squadron supported the division’s infantry regi- dale Field, Louisiana.103 Hawaii did receive a boost in or- ments with simulated air attacks and flew as targets for ganizational structure in 1931 with the activation of the small arms anti-aircraft firing training. Soon the 26th At- 18th Composite Wing as the senior Air Corps element in tack A–3B aircraft were equipped with a smoke screen ap- Hawaiian Department on May 1 at Fort Shafter.104 The paratus used to lay smoke curtains during Division structure was now in place that would see Hawaii’s air el- maneuvers.108 The pursuit squadrons continued their ement through the end of the 1930s. training regimen for pursuit pilots with air-to-air gunnery. The squadrons also worked on their secondary mission of Through the Depression light attack with air-to-ground gunnery and low altitude bombing. Pursuit pilots would also work with the bombard- The Annual Training Plan for the Air Corps in the ment squadrons to practice both escorting missions as well 1930s ran from November 1 to October 31. In the early as using the bombers as training targets for aerial at- 1930s, the training plans for 18th Composite Wing units tacks.109 continued to emphasize many inter-island flights, with 5th Composite Group exercises emphasized naviga- each pilot being required to fly to Hawaii three times and tion, inter-plane communication, and radio contact with Kauai at least twice. 105 Each squadron was also scheduled Luke Field as well as rendezvous operations.110 The Group for an annual two week gunnery and bombing practice at also worked with the 26th Attack, which was more aligned Waimanalo Range. Permanent buildings were slowly built in mission to the Luke Field squadrons than its pursuit at the range using maintenance funds, and soon a mess brethren at Wheeler Field. For four days in March 1931 hall, recreation room, shower and latrines, officers’ quar- the 5th Group and the 26th Attack did extensive maneu- ters, and wooden framed and floored tents for use by en- vers to include establishing patrols around Maui, Molokai listed airmen were in place. 106 and Hawaii for cooperating with the Coast Artillery Com- In 1931 the 4th Observation continued its close coop- mand Post. The maneuver culminated in an attack on eration with the Hawaiian Division, testing infantry liai- Oahu, which was defended by the 18th Pursuit Group.111

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 17 the wing. In August 1931, the 18th Composite Wing Head- quarters worked to have a strip of land adjoining Molokai Airport transferred to the War Department to be utilized as a site for underground gas and oil storage, radio instal- lation and shelter as part of a program establishing oper- ating bases on each of the Hawaiian Islands. This plan was apparently approved, for by the end of November an in- spection was made of recently installed service tanks at Upolu Point, Hawaii, fueling facilities at Port Allen airport, Kauai, and a warehouse at Homestead Field, Molokai. By June 1932 radio personnel were stationed at Upolu Point, Hawaii.117 The planned 1932 joint exercise was viewed with ap- A 4th Observation Squadron Thomas Morse O–19C parked on grass prehension by the airmen in Washington. On April 1, 1931, with other O–19 aircraft. The large 4-pointed star on the fuselage side a new Naval Air Operating Policy took effect, changing was the insignia of the 4th. O–19Cs arrived in April 1931 and the last air- naval air stations to fleet air bases with a primary fleet craft were surveyed out in 1936. support mission. This policy also provided long range patrol aircraft to Navy units in Hawaii. Though dedicated to the 18th Composite Wing tactical exercises were a culmination fleet, the aircraft could be utilized in support of the Army of the squadron and group exercises. On May 19-21, 1931 when requested for local defense work. There was still con- a wing exercise envisioned a scenario that Maui had been cern in Washington over which service would cover the attacked and occupied by an adversary. The wing con- overwater reconnaissance mission.118 ducted a bombing attack against the Maui towns of Grand Joint Exercise Number 4 lasted for eight days Wailuku and Wailea using five LB–6 and two O–19 es- in February 1932, and was fought with the ‘Blue’ Expedi- corted by a Sikorsky amphibian and supported by eighteen tionary force fighting to capture the Hawaiian Islands from P–12 and nine A–3. On the second day, the pursuit ‘Black’. In the week prior to the start of the exercise, 18th squadrons became the defending adversaries, operating Composite Wing aircraft flew to various islands to trans- from Wailea to defend Hilo from attack by the 5th Group port supplies, equipment and personnel to establish ground and 26th Attack. On the last day, the bomb, pursuit and at- observations posts and air operating bases. The 50th Ob- tack squadrons attacked Pearl Harbor with the two obser- servation was designated to remain at Luke Field to fly vation squadrons conducting air patrols to detect intruding aerial offshore and inshore patrols of Oahu. The 4th Ob- aircraft.112 A reduced exercise was held June 25-26, where servation was tasked with establishing outposts to detect the wing flew fifty-two aircraft to Wailea, ‘bombed’ enemy the approaching enemy fleet and dispersed its aircraft forces, then recovered at the airport and flew back to Oahu throughout the Hawaiian Islands. A Flight with four O– the following day.113 In July two wing exercises were flown 19B and one Douglas amphibian operated from Home- to attack an “enemy” ammunition and supply dump at stead Field, Molokai; B Flight with three O–19B flew from Waimanalo on Oahu. A smaller exercise held in August Port Allen, Kauai; and C Flight with three O–19B was witnessed bomb and observation aircraft attacking an ob- based at Hilo, Hawaii. Each 4th Observation flight covered jective defended by the 6th Pursuit Squadron.114 three routes three times per day. Regular dawn and dusk In early November 1931 the wing participated in the patrols were dispatched starting February 6 with special Hawaiian Department maneuvers. Though heavily patrols flown as ordered during periods of darkness when- scripted, the exercise did reveal planned air power employ- ever a ground sector reported activity. ment for the era. The 4th Observation was tasked with de- The other 18th Composite Wing squadrons were dis- fense against enemy landing forces. The airmen also played persed throughout Oahu. The 72nd Bombardment flew the adversary, with the 26th Attack and the two bomb nine bombers from a field site in the Waianae Pocket south squadrons performing a night attack on Pearl Harbor de- of Kole Kole Pass while the 23rd Bombardment flew its fended by the 64th Coast Artillery (AA).115 In December the nine bombers between multiple emergency fields. The 6th wing continued training in preparation for the Joint Army- Pursuit moved its thirteen aircraft into a camouflaged po- Navy Maneuvers/Grand Joint Exercise Number 4 in Feb- sition near Wheeler Field while the 19th Pursuit moved its ruary 1932, including inshore and offshore patrols, range 19 aircraft to the Division Review Field at Schofield Bar- finding and spotting missions, bombing, and support to racks. The 26th Attack flew from different emergency land- ground forces. 116 ing fields. All aircraft were camouflaged and dummy As the airmen started to understand the role that air- aircraft displayed at Wheeler and Luke Fields. 119 The ex- power would play in the archipelago, they began to modify ercise started on February 7, when 172 ‘Blue’ aircraft their war plans. The wing exercises made it apparent that launched at dawn from the USS Lexington and USS inter-island bombing missions were possible and if an Saratoga against Wheeler and Luke Fields. The defending enemy gained a toehold in the islands they could rapidly ‘Black’ forces stayed concealed, not trying to counter the bring forces to bear on any of the other islands. Dispersed overwhelming force. On February 8, Navy ‘Blue’ aircraft operations were starting to appear in wartime planning at struck the outlying airfields, but ‘Black’ aircraft were air-

18 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 Aerial view of Luke Field, Oahu, T.H. in April 1932 depicts 18th Composite Wing aircraft lined up for inspection. The “Navy side” of the base is in the foreground and the “Air Corps side” is at the center of the photograph. borne over Kahuka Point, intending to follow ‘Blue’ back arrived in Hawaii.121 Eight P–12E aircraft arrived on the to their carrier but weather intervened. ‘Black’ Air Corps transport ship USAT Meigs on Dec 21, 1931.122 Though this observation aircraft found 31 Navy PK and PD seaplanes put the Hawaiian Department at over forty pursuit aircraft, at Hilo harbor, Hawaii resulting in a strike by the 26th At- with an average of twelve in the depot this left about fifteen tack Squadron against the seaplanes and Hilo Airport. On operational aircraft per squadron with a planned attrition February 9, 18th Composite Wing ‘Black’ observation air- rate of four per year. In a note to Washington, the 18th Com- craft were out again searching for the ‘Blue’ fleet. Once it posite Wing outlined their wartime requirement as dictated was located and reported back to Oahu, orders were ra- by the Primary Tactical Plan, Hawai ian Department, to be dioed to the bombers of the 23rd and 72nd Bombardment fifty-two aircraft. The wing preferred this to be all P–12E Squadrons to attack the carriers fifty-five miles off Barbers aircraft, an aircraft seen as a “very satisfactory pursuit type Pont, Oahu. An attack was made on the carriers by the for the work required here,” a fact backed by the Air Corps bombers while the two pursuit squadrons and the attack view that noted the metal-skinned P–12Es were “especially squadron engaged Navy fighters off Barbers Point. The adapted to Foreign Possessions” due to the ease of mainte- USS Saratoga was declared sunk by the umpires. On early nance as compared to the fabric covered P–12B and earlier February 10, enemy transports were reported off the north pursuit aircraft.123 Head quarters Air Corps responded to the coast of Oahu; the bomb squadrons took off and were joined request by stating no additional fighters planned for FY33 by the 26th Attack and struck under the light of aerial and equipping Hawaii with more airframes would require flares, hitting three transports. On February 11, the pur- stripping other units.124 suit squadrons attacked the remaining carrier while Feb- On June 1, 1931, the 18th Composite Wing consoli- ruary 12 wrapped up the exercise with an attack on the dated all Air Corps repair and supply functions in Hawaii remaining transports off the west coast of Oahu. 120 The ex- by combining the 65th Service Squadron’s two sections at ercise validated 18th Composite Wing’s dispersal plans and Luke Field with the Air Section of the Hawaiian General scouting and attack tactics but highlighted the need for Depot in Honolulu, established in July 1921, to create the more aerial forces for the Hawaiian Department. Hawaiian Air Depot.125 By June 1932, Wheeler Field Unfortunately, the Depression-era budget of the Air opened its new officer and NCO quarters, barracks, and up- Corps could do little more than keep the squadrons at their graded flying field and started construction of new hangars. required strength—there were no resources to grow. Twenty 126 A new range for gunnery training was also installed new P–12C and twelve O–19C aircraft arrived in April 1931. south of Wheeler Field for use by 18th Pursuit Group, sav- This brought both observation squadrons up to their re- ing transit time to Waimanalo Range. 127 In late 1932, a new quired strengths. In May the first of twelve B–5A aircraft high altitude bombing range for the bombardment

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 19 Aerial view of Upolo (Upolu) Landing Field, Hawaii, T.H. taken in June 1932. This appears to depict a 18th Pursuit Group navigation exercise with three probable amphibian aircraft and forty six smaller aircraft including possible P–12s. By this time underground gas and oil installations were in place at Upolo and radio personnel were assigned to the field. squadrons was constructed on the flats of Ahua Point, re- Training in 1932 was little changed from 1931. Both placing an old hulk sunk outside of Pearl Harbor. The tar- observation squadrons and the 26th Attack continued their get was a 200 ft diameter circle with a 30 ft diameter bulls work with field and coast artillery units as well as the in- eye constructed of metal drums filled with sand. 128 fantry while the 18th Pursuit Group did cooperative small arms anti-aircraft training with the Hawaiian Division. Continued Work with Less Searchlight tracking missions were flown for the 64th Coast Artillery (AA) by the 18th Pursuit Group’s Sikorsky In September 1929, the Commanding General of the C–6A and 23rd Bombardment bombers. In a view towards Hawaiian Department recommended that Battery Willis- their wartime role of attacking ships, the 72nd Bombard- ton, two 16-inch coast artillery guns with a range of 49,000 ment experimented with hitting a target towed across the yards, be fired using data furnished with aircraft. Initially water.131 The two week annual gunnery camp was again the request was turned down by the Office of the Chief of held at Waimanalo Military Reservation, though squa - Coast Artillery in Washington because similar tests were drons were now required to transport the majority of their being conducted in Panama that could inform the tests on personnel and equipment to camp by air and Waimanalo’s Oahu. In 1931, Washington agreed to go forward with runway was now paved. 132 Wing exercises appeared to con- Hawaiian tests in Fiscal Year 1932 (FY32) with a special centrate on the pursuit squadrons defending against at- allotment of ammunition provided for the firing.129 The tacks by the other squadrons of the wing.133 The 5th Coast Artillery Board secured a spotting instrument from Composite Group practiced group tactical exercises con- the Navy and after modifications flew it in an observation trolled by the command plane of the group commander and aircraft from Langley Field. The actual firing exercise was also did minor joint exercises with the U.S. Navy.134 In a relatively complicated for its day. In order to know the nod to its planned wartime task, the 4th Observation flew exact location of the aircraft, it was tracked with radio di- to an advanced operating base on Molokai and set up an rection finding stations in order to get a precise fix on the observation line between Molokai and Oahu to look for ma- airplane and enable the depression and azimuth angles rauding 14th Naval District aircraft operating from Hilo. from the spotting instrument to be converted to actual co- When the Navy patrol aircraft were spotted, a radio mes- ordinates for the gun battery. In March 1932, the plans sage alerted the 18th Pursuit Group and enabled them to were carried out against targets at 40,000 yards and perform an intercept.135 Inter-island ‘airways’ flights also greater from the gun battery, located at Fort Weaver. The continued to be flown at the group level, up to five per 5th Composite Group provided one of its newly-delivered month, with the added task of inspecting and maintaining Y1C–21 Dolphin aircraft for the work, with an observer’s the facilities of the unmanned dispersal airfields.136 These cockpit in the nose mounting the special spotting equip- facilities had been expanded from the prior year, with un- ment. The aircraft remained five miles from the target to derground gas and oil installations constructed at Upolu simulate staying out of the effective range of anti-aircraft Point, Hawaii and Molokai airport, Molokai; warehouses fire. In October 1932 additional missions were flown, build- were also built at Molokai. Fort Allen airport, Kauai was ing on the work from earlier in the year.130 upgraded with underground tanks, warehouses, and new

20 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 twenty-man barracks and radio tower and hut. Fifteen flown for the dual purpose of pilot proficiency and dispersal emergency landing fields on Oahu were improved, with ob- field inspection. A Training Memorandum of the era from structions removed and wind cones and landing tees in- the Hawaiian Department required each pilot to visit all stalled. Finally, a new landing field was constructed at Fort outlying fields in the Territory once each year.Support for Shafter for the Wing Headquarters as well as future air the Hawaiian Division included not only the annual field ambulance use at Tripler General Hospital.137 exercises held at the end of the training year, but also tac- The next Grand Joint Exercise was scheduled for early tical work with the infantry and artillery units – both re- 1933 and involved the USS Lexington and USS Saratoga. quiring Air Corps support either in the cooperation role or The operation started with the dispersal of 18th Composite to act as aggressors. Training missions for the 64th Coast Wing squadrons on January 30. The 72nd Bombardment Artillery (AA) continued to draw a fair amount of attention, flew from Waimanalo while the 19th Pursuit returned to with three to five observation squadron aircraft assigned its familiar haunt of the Division Review Field. The 50th to support the firing at Waimanalo for six weeks in 1935.141 Observation, flying from Kauai, Molokai and Hawaii, Group and Wing level exercises continued to be re- joined three U.S. Navy patrol plane squadrons from Pearl fined, becoming more realistic in their scenarios and in- Harbor in searching for the ‘Black’ fleet by maintaining pa- creasing in complexity. Gone were the ‘wing rendezvous’ trols about Oahu, Molokai, Kaui and the northern shore of missions of an earlier era. In December 1935, the 18th Hawaii. On the morning of February 1, a ‘Blue’ patrol air- Composite Wing held a “Wing Communications exercise” craft sighted the USS Lexington 40 miles north of Molokai. with the 23rd Bombardment playing the role of the adver- A radio call went back to Oahu and the entire 18th Com- sary and deploying to Hilo airfield. The next morning all posite Wing assembled over Waimanalo and, reinforced by remaining 18th Composite Wing squadrons deployed to twelve Navy bombers, headed out to attack the carrier. The outlying stations and prepared to respond to an enemy at- USS Lexington had already launched a strike on Pearl tack. The two observation squadrons were on Molokai and Harbor when the Air Corps attacked, sinking the carrier. established a constant patrol to intercept incoming As the 18th Composite Wing recovered, the USS Saratoga bombers. Soon the bombers of the 23rd Bombardment were launched an attack on Oahu. Waiting ‘Blue’ observation airborne, enroute to attack Pearl Harbor. Once sighted by aircraft followed the attacking aircraft back to their carrier the observation craft, the ‘enemy’ bombers were trailed and and call went back to Oahu for a second strike. As the 18th position reports sent to Luke Field. The pursuit squadrons Composite Wing was launching its forces, the umpires is- took off and intercepted the enemy at Koko Head while the sued a recall message and ended Phase 1 of the exercise. remaining 18th Composite Wing bombers and attack air- Phase 2 entailed airborne control of the wing via radio and craft took off and were ready to trail the returning enemy bombing of targets (enemy landing parties) on the and “sink their carrier.” 142 There was also an increase in Waimanalo Range but was hampered by weather. The 26th joint activities with local Navy aviation units. “Minor Joint Attack, supported by the 19th Pursuit, interdicted enemy Communication Exercises” and “Minor Joint Training Ex- naval forces doing coastal bombardment off Haleiwa, fol- ercises” filled the training calendars of the groups. For ex- lowed by a general wing attack against enemy landing ample, in June 1933, Minor Joint Training Exercise forces. Phase 3, run from February 7 through 9, saw the Number 2 saw one of the bomb squadrons cooperating with entire 18th Composite Wing becoming the adversary force naval aviation and 18th Pursuit Group in simulated at- alongside a battalion of infantry and attacking the defend- tacks on enemy aircraft carriers east of Oahu.143 The Joint ing forces of the Hawaiian Division.138 Army Navy Fleet Exercise held in May 1935, saw attack, Though 18th Composite Wing activities in 1933 ap- bombardment, pursuit, and observation squadrons per- peared to continue as before with airways flights and train- form surveillance missions to include flying at low altitude ing missions Depression budgets were starting to bite to locate hostile submarines trying to attack the fleet. 144 flight operations in Hawaii. In September 1933, the 18th “Mission creep” started to appear as the federal gov- Composite Wing tried to order spare parts for P–12 and A– ernment tried to spread out its budget. In the first ten 3 aircraft but was told that purchase of spare parts was months of FY34 the 18th Composite Wing flew over sixty- curtailed for the remainder of FY34. In addition, operating nine hours for the Hawaiian Department on missions such funds had also dried up, impacting the ability of the Hawai- as sowing seeds, looking for lost persons, and working with ian Department to purchase shop equipment for the the National Guard. To counter this, in FY35 the 18th Hawaiian Air Depot.139 Lack of spares and degraded depot Composite Wing requested 100 hours for supporting the capabilities had already started to impact Hawaiian air op- Hawaiian Department, though not all support missions erations even before this date; in November 1932 three of turned out to be routine.145 On December 24, 1935, Colonel the fourteen bomber aircraft assigned to 5th Composite Emmons, wing commander, flew over the Manua Lea lava Group were past due for overhaul with two declared unsafe flow on Hawaii and after witnessing the impending natu- to fly. The average number of airplanes in commission in ral disaster, committed to trying to save the city of Hilo. each tactical organization during the training year was Two days later the 5th Composite Group dispatched ten six.140 Still, the Hawaiian Department made do with what bombers, two amphibians and two observation aircraft to it had. Hilo. All pilots were loaded into an amphibian with a Na- Flight activities in the years 1933 to 1935 were little tional Park Service volcanologist and flown over the changed from the prior years. Airways flights were still Manua Lea lava flow to study the target and hear recom-

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 21 the cross-wind runway. Unfortunately, the proposal was turned down in Washington for lack of funds with a recom- mendation to resubmit for FY39 funds. 150 Lack of funds not only impacted Bellows Field, it also was delaying the final phase of development of the Hawaiian Air Corps in- frastructure—the replacement of Luke Field.

A New Home and Changing Roles for the Airmen

In 1928, the War Department recognized the necessity of expanding the air defenses of Hawaii and appointed a Board of Officers to select a suitable airdrome site on Oahu. Only one location was found, 2,225 acres owned by private landowners located at the inlet to Pearl Harbor near Fort Kamehameha. Condemnation proceedings were started Brig. Gen. Billy Mitchell inspecting Luke Field, likely early 1920s. Mitchell’s vision for the role of air power in Hawaii was to fulfill two func- but quickly suspended due to lack of funds. Funds were fi- tions: support land forces in Hawaii and act as an air force capable of nally available in January 1935 and by April 9 the land defensive and independent offensive actions. was acquired. On May 21, 1935, Hickam Field was estab- lished, named in honor of Lt Col Horace Hickam who had mended targeting solutions. The plan was to drop 600-lb. died the prior year in an aircraft accident. On July 26, demolition bombs to divert the lava flow from the city of 1935, Capt Howard Nurse, Quartermasters Corps, arrived Hilo and the headwaters of the Wailuku River. Five to supervise construction. Nurse’s plans for Hickam Field bombers took off on December 27, bombed the lava flow, re- incorporated the airfield, facilities, plus the Air Depot and turned to rearm, and attacked again, each bomber drop- were projected to cost $5M. The plans were approved by ping two demolition bombs per sortie. After the second Hawaiian Department Commanding General Maj Gen attack, the flow was diverted. 146 Hugh Drum on August 16. The funds, contained within the Aircraft assigned to Hawaii slowly evolved in the mid- Second Deficiency Act signed by President Roosevelt, were 1930s. The Air Corps desperately tried to keep abreast of allocated with construction projected to take 2.5 years.151 the rapid technology changes occurring in this era with its With the loosening of Air Corps aircraft procurement limited budget. New Martin B–10/B–12 bombers pur- budgets, new aircraft—or at least new to Hawaii—started chased under the FY33 procurement program were as- to arrive in 1936. During the year, the 18th Composite signed to stations in the continental US. Once the new Wing received six P–12E, fifteen A–12, eighteen B–12A, Martin bombers were delivered, ten older B–4A bombers and six BT–2 aircraft as well as enough new trucks to in- displaced by the new order were delivered to Hawaii, top- crease the vehicle fleet by 400%.152 The P–12Es that ar- ping the 18th Composite Wing off with twenty-five rived were the last pursuit aircraft the Hawaiian bombers.147 One Douglas C–26/OA–4 was also delivered to Department would see for a year, the obsolete P–12s hav- Hawaii in early 1933 for observation, transport and plane ing to soldier on because of higher priorities stateside. P– guard purposes. Ten additional P–12E aircraft were also 26s were scheduled to replace the P–12s when they were allotted to Hawaii at the same time, with the Boeing fight- no longer serviceable.153 The A–12s were ‘used’ aircraft ers being in place by December 1934.148 With “new” B–4A from bases in the Continental U.S. that were refurbished aircraft in place, four of the older LB–6s were retired with at San Antonio Depot prior to shipment to Hawaii and the five older P–12B/C aircraft also retiring with receipt of ad- BT–2s were assigned for instrument flying purposes, join- ditional P–12Es.149 ing newly-delivered Link trainers.154 By 1936, Waimanalo was becoming ill-suited for the In 1934 a “new set up” for the two observation modern aircraft that were starting to equip the units in squadrons in Hawaii changed their function from ground- Hawaii. Renamed Bellows Field on August 19, 1933, the focused corps and division support assets to Air Force sup- base’s runway had sand dunes and the beach at one end port. This change was in line with the overall defense plans and coral knolls at the other, with cuts made through these for Oahu and required the units to be equipped with longer obstructions to allow a paved 1800-foot runway. This run- range aircraft. Since none were available when this change way work had been done incrementally through the use of was made, a conscious decision was made to survey the O– annual maintenance and repair funds, as had the slow 19s when they came due for overhaul. The observation build up of frame buildings for the housing of deployed per- squadrons would then have to make do with borrowed air- sonnel. A shorter dirt strip was used as the cross runway. craft from other squadrons and the four assigned amphib- The P–12s and A–3s were confined to the paved runway, ians until new aircraft were available.155 By the early part resulting in many crashes under cross-wind conditions; the of 1936 the 4th Observation surveyed its last eight O–19s paved runway itself was not suitable for modern aircraft and six B–12s were received for long range reconnais - such as B–12s and A–12s. In December 1936, a proposal sance.156 This action was apparently at odds with the was put forth to double the width of the paved runway to Hawaiian Department Commander who in November 150 feet and lengthen it to 2,500 feet as well as improve 1936, fired off a note highlighting the inadequacy of B–12s

22 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 would only worsen the following year, for in 1937, Air Corps seniority restrictions for piloting multi-engine aircraft re- duced the number of 5th Composite Group pilots who could fly B–12s as most pilots in Hawaii were too junior. 164 Unfortunately for the Air Corps, the B–12s were not delivered and integrated into operations by the 1936 Joint Maneuvers. The 5th Composite Group was lacking suitable long range modern aircraft and let the Navy, equipped with forty-eight long range patrol aircraft, fly the majority of the “Army mission” with these and carrier aircraft, not reflect- ing well on the Army’s ability to defend Hawaii.165 This matter remained unresolved in the 1937 maneuvers as still too few B–12s were available for both the reconnaissance A DH–4B from the 5th Composite Group on display at the Territorial Fair and strike role. All aircraft, including fifty Navy flying in Honolulu, October 1921. Between 1919 and 1923 the Air Service con- boats, were under the command of the 18th Composite tracted to have 1,538 DH–4s remanufactured into DH-4Bs by moving the Wing commander. The Navy flying boats, modern Consol- pilot's seat back and the gas tank forward, correcting the most serious problems in the DH–4 design. Of these, 100 were allotted to the Hawaii idated PBY-1s, were assigned the long range reconnais- with a further reserve of fifty, with aircraft serving at Luke Field between sance role and all Army long range aircraft—B–12s in ‘drab 1920 and 1926 before replacement by the DH–4M. camouflage’—were held as a strike force. On the first day of the exercise the USS Ranger was located and attacked supporting ground troops and adjusting artillery fire and by eight B–12s; on the second day seventeen B–12s at- requested six corps observation aircraft to assist with the tacked the USS Lexington and USS Saratoga with Navy department.157 Air Corps staff responded that while they PBYs attacking the Lexington as well. The last day fea- understood the requirement, no aircraft of that type were tured landing operations. It was felt that the Pursuit available and recommended using assigned attack aircraft Group would have been “smothered” under actual condi- for supporting ground forces.158 Eventually six O–46A air- tions due to the Fleet’s “immense superiority in all types craft were added to the Hawaiian Department allotment of aircraft” and the Hawaiian Air Force wiped out.166 For table in September 1937 and though plans were made to Navy Fleet Problem 19 held March 25-30, 1938, the 5th ship the aircraft in mid-1938 they ended up being re-routed Bomb Group operated under the command of “Red Fleet, to the Philippines.159 On January 25, 1938, the 4th and Air Patrol and Attack Force,” the Navy unit that coordi- 50th Observation Squadrons were redesignated as recon- nated land based aircraft. Naval aviation flew from Oahu, naissance squadrons, with a focus on working with the Hilo, French Frigate Shoals and Johnson Island while the bombardment squadrons. Training had already switched 5th Bomb Group flew from Luke and Hickam Fields. Like to bombardment tactics the prior June.160 As interim sup- the year prior, the Navy utilized 60 PBY-1 aircraft for the port for Hawaiian Division cooperative missions, four B– initial patrolling and reserved the Martin bombers for the 12A aircraft were assigned to the 18th Pursuit Group for final attack on “Blue Fleet”, including the carriers USS that purpose in November 1938.161 It would not be until Ranger and USS Saratoga. Post-exercise, Colonel Harmon, February 1940 that the Hawaiian Division received its ded- 5th Bomb Group commander, complained to Brigadier icated support unit with the activation of the O–47- General H. H. Arnold about the poor command and control equipped 86th Observation Squadron. of the Navy.167 The eighteen B–12s received in 1936, were spread The Joint Exercises of the early and mid-1930s helped across the 5th Composite Group, with three to each bomb define the air power mission in Hawaii. By the time the squadron and six to each observation squadron. To bulk up Army Operating Defense Plans for the Hawaiian Coastal available airframes for training, each bomb squadron was Frontier were issued in 1938, the 18th Composite Wing also assigned six B–4/B–5 aircraft while the observation was an integral part of the joint defense solution. The over- squadrons had P–12As and an OA–4. With the new air- all objective of the plan was to hold Oahu as a main outly- craft came a new mission, and in June 1937, the 50th Ob- ing naval base against enemy attack. The mission of the servation Squadron training objective for the new fiscal 18th Composite Wing was threefold: 1) conduct air opera- year showed a focus on both observation as well as bom- tions against hostile naval air and expeditionary forces 2) bardment tactics.162 Though the Hawaiian Department defend air stations, bases and auxiliary fields against air was starting to get healthy with aircraft, another problem attack and sabotage 3) conduct reconnaissance essential cropped up—trained pilots. The B–12s were considered to own combat efficiency and supplement naval air forces such a change over the Keystone bombers that “consider- in securing information on hostile fleet movements. The able training will be necessary before an even passable 5th Group was to be prepared for reconnaissance and bombing performance can be obtained.” The Department strike missions against hostile naval forces out to a 300 commander requested pilots be assigned to the 18th Com- mile radius area of responsibility, with squadrons deploy- posite Wing with prior B–12 experience.163 The response ing to designated dispersal fields. The 72nd Bombardment from Washington stated five officers were already enroute Squadron was to remain on alert as a strike force at Oahu, who fit those qualifications. Unfortunately the situation while the other squadrons dispersed to Maui, Hawaii,

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 23 for squadron use with three in depot maintenance; this did not actually occur until early FY38. Hawaii had twelve P– 12B, C, and D aircraft on hand that were expected to be surveyed by June 1937 but the thirty remaining P–12E air- craft were deemed to have at least two years life left and not requiring replacement. Two C-33 aircraft were later added to the annual allotment in January 1937 and after delivery flew a steady routine of inter-island flights.175 The stingy FY37 aircraft plan was the result of limited procurement by the Air Corps in Fiscal Years 1930 to 1935 due to a lack of funds. Once funds were released in FY36, priority went to repairing the run down units in the States with a conscious decision made to let the overseas units weather through the storm with their existing stocks of ob- solete aircraft. 18th Composite Wing Commander Brig Gen Barton Yount voiced his concerns about aging aircraft to Air Corps Chief General Westover during a visit in fall 1937, earning a mild rebuke from Assistant Chief of the Air Aerial view of Luke Field, Oahu, T.H. in 1925 depicts 5th Composite Group aircraft lined up for inspection. Aircraft lined up include fourteen Corps Brig Gen Henry H. “Hap” Arnold. Arnold concurred MB–3A, five SE–5E, thirteen DH–4, and eight NBS–1. on the need for modern aircraft in Hawaii, but asked Yount “if you will tell me where they are coming from, it will solve a lot of problems back here” and proceeded to outline delays Oahu, and Kauai. The 18th Pursuit Group’s mission was in delivery of Seversky P–35s and observation aircraft.176 to intercept and destroy hostile aviation within the 300 In a follow-up letter regarding Hawaii’s lack of pilots, mile radius of action, with a focus on defending Oahu. The Arnold explained to Yount that like aircraft acquisition, pursuit ships were to be dispersed into revetments and personnel manning was also restricting Air Corps opera- under camouflage but still operating from Wheeler.168 tions though “the future looks brighter.”177 To get through The later 1930s showed no dramatic change in how the this tough patch, the Hawaiian Department was author- 18th Composite Wing trained its airmen. All squadrons ized to make do with what they had and allowed to convert continued to spend two weeks per year at Bellows Field for B–4 aircraft to transports to make up for a lack of cargo annual gunnery camp. 169 Squadrons also would venture to planes available to the department and use B–5A aircraft South Cape, Oahu for a week of field training; these two for the tow target role.178 On October 27, 1937, the 72nd deployments made up the annual field training require- Bombardment turned in its last B–5A. It was flown to Bel- ment for 18th Composite Wing units. 170 The 18th Pursuit lows Field for use as a bombing target. 179 Group was tasked with attacking adversary landing forces In 1935 the Hawaiian Air Depot was still operating as at day and night with both the pursuit and attack aircraft. a sub-depot of Rockwell Air Depot in San Diego, California. In 1936 and 1937, the group conducted tests at night This had the unfortunate effect of adding delays onto the against floating targets simulating landing craft, using air- already long supply line to Hawaii as some items had to be craft-dropped parachute flares, coast artillery searchlights sent back to California for repair. A program was initiated and natural moonlight to aid in target acquisition. The to address these deficiencies and prepare Hawaii to operate floating targets varied, including a fifty-foot steel boat that a larger number of more complex and modern aircraft.180 had run aground and salvaged Quartermaster boats that On August 31, 1936, the Hawaiian Air Depot had 223 civil- were set adrift.171 The 5th Composite Group continued its ian employees. forty-seven were clerical—typist, storekeep- work with coast artillery, flying its OA–4 to spot for gun ers, stenographers, etc—twelve were “higher” skilled such batteries and continuing to support 64th Coast Artillery as foremen and senior aircraft mechanics, 114 were “me- (AA) firing practice with target towing and providing tar- chanics” and fifty skilled and unskilled laborers.181 In ad- gets for searchlight crews to track at night. 172 Airways dition, eighty-nine enlisted men of the 65th Service flights continued as well, with squadrons adding in Squa dron were on duty with the Hawaiian Air Depot.182 By overnight stays or field exercises. Longer distance flights October 1937, the ‘civilianization’ of the depot was com- to the southern islands allowed the pilots in the Hawaiian plete, with all enlisted personnel being replaced by civilian Department to meet their 500 mile cross country flight an- employees. At the same time certain departments of the nual training requirement.173 Hawaiian Department ma- depot to include sheet metal, instrument, and machinist neuvers were unchanged from prior years, though were expanded with the intent of making the Hawaiian Air squadrons did deploy to emergency landing strips and op- Depot as nearly self-sustaining as possible.183 erate under field conditions for day and night missions in both adversary and defending roles. 174 The Pace Towards War Picks Up The FY37 aircraft plan was to ship six A–12 aircraft to Hawaii in February 1937, to supplement the earlier ship- The pace towards modernizing the 18th Composite ment of fifteen airframes to ensure eighteen were available Wing continued to gain steam. Even though Hickam Field

24 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 Hawaii.191 What actually arrived was a slight mixture and included a used Sikorsky Y1OA–8 from Hamilton Field, one OA–4B, and four BT–9B for instrument training.192 Three P–26As from the mainland were received by the 18th Pursuit Group on July 14, 1937, for tests to determine their suitability for use in Hawaii’s climate.193 After the tests proved their fitness for Hawaii, twenty-eight “used” P–26A aircraft arrived in March 1938. This was the start of a rapid shell game of pursuit aircraft movements be- tween Air Corps bases in the Pacific. In June 1938, the Hawaiian Department was directed to select ten of the re- cently arrived P–26A aircraft, refurbish them, and load then on the transport ship USAT Meigs bound for the Photo taken in March 1929, likely at Luke Field, depicting a Martin NBS–1 194 with a Boeing MB–3A. The higher landing speeds of the pursuit aircraft Philippines in September. The Meigs would unload four- made operations of them from Luke Field a challenge. teen P–26Bs for Hawaii at the same time.195 By the end of the transactions, Hawaii was left with twenty one P–26A and fourteen P–26B pursuit aircraft. A transition was still under construction, the 18th Composite Wing aircraft, the P–26 Peashooter soon found itself displaced Headquarters Flight moved into its new facilities on Sep- by more advanced designs like the Curtiss P–36. Delivery tember 1, 1937. On that date, the organization was also re- of the P–36 to the Air Corps started in April 1938 and by designated as 18th Wing, Air Corps. The rest of the 18th late 1939 twenty P–36s were on hand in Hawaii. Wing finally moved on October 30, 1937 and marked the New bombers were on the way to Hawaii as well. B– formal opening of Hickam. 184 As part of its plan to build 18s fresh from the Douglas production line started delivery the Composite Wings in Hawaii and Panama, on January in early 1938 and continued at a pace of six per U.S. Army 20, 1938 the General Headquarters Air Force ordered the Transport until thirty were in place by July, with the final 31st Bombardment Squadron from Hamilton Field, Cali- three scheduled for August 1938.196 For a period of the year fornia to the Hawaiian Department. Movement of person- airmen in Hawaii were treated to the interesting sight of nel and aircraft occurred via Army Transport in February the old and the new, with 23rd Bombardment Squadron 1938, with the arriving airmen sleeping under canvas at Keystone bombers parked next to the gleaming new B– Hickam Field until their barracks were completed the fol- 18s. 197 Though the Hawaiian Department was getting lowing January.185 The Air Corps viewed that the transfer flooded with new aircraft, there were limits to what facili- of the 31st Bombardment and its thirteen B–18s coupled ties and manpower could absorb. In 1938 the Commanding with an additional twenty B–18s would substitute for the General of the department turned down four BC-1, five P– B–10Bs originally scheduled to be shipped to Hawaii dur- 26B and fifteen A–17 aircraft to ship in first half of FY 39, ing FY38.186 stating that additional aircraft other than cargo were not Organizational name changes were also occurring dur- desired at present due to an inability to house or operate ing this time period. On January 25, 1938, the 65th Service them.198 Changes would come in FY40 as new pursuit air- Squadron became the 17th Air Base Squadron and the craft arrived to start replacing the obsolescent P–26s, but 75th Service Squadron became the 18th Air Base by then facilities had been upgraded and Hawaii was well Squadron. 187 On March 25, 1938, the 5th Composite Group on its way to a war footing. became the 5th Bombardment Group. In September 1938 In the first week of March 1938, the 23rd Bombard- the 4th and 50th Reconnaissance Squadrons were relieved ment was transferred from Luke Field to Hickam Field. All from assignment to the 5th Bomb Group but were attached its B–12A aircraft were left behind at Luke as its pilots to the group; the 26th Attack Squadron was relieved from started training on the B–18 under instruction from the assignment to the 5th Group and assigned to the 18th Pur- 31st Bombardment Squadron. The next month the 72nd suit Group.188 With name changes and reorganizations Bombardment followed its sister squadron, leaving behind came moves. General Orders Number 1, issued by Head- its B–12s and picking up five B–18s for training at Hickam. quarters 18th Wing on January 1, 1939, moved Headquar- With the bomb squadrons transitioning to B–18s, the older ters 5th Bomb Group from Luke Field to Hickam Field. 189 B–12s were transferred to the reconnaissance squadrons Later in the year the 4th and 50th Reconnaissance Squa - to give them more long range aircraft. The 4th Reconnais- drons were ordered to move from Luke Field to Hickam sance grew in strength from five to ten aircraft in April- Field with a deadline of October 31. Buildings small May 1938 and by September 1938 pilots from both the 4th enough to be moved by barge were floated to Hickam to and 50th Reconnaissance were training on the B–18. 199 augment the tent city. 190 The last occupant to move out of The B–12s still had utility for the department and were Luke Field was the Hawaiian Air Depot, which did not used by the bomb squadrons for aerial gunnery training as shift to Hickam Field until September 13, 1940, due to the well as support to the tow target mission for the 64th Coast last of its construction funds not releasing until FY40. Artillery (AA). The FY38 aircraft plan had promised three transports, The new aircraft enabled the 18th Wing to start train- twenty five bombers, and fifteen pursuit aircraft to ing in earnest for its mission of protecting the Hawaiian

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 25 port, Lanai. C–33 and Y1–OA–8 flights moved personnel and supplies to Lanai with airmen living under canvas while flying and maintaining eight P–12 aircraft that flew patrols off Lanai, Molokai and Maui. In May 1939 the 6th Pursuit spent five days at Hilo, Hawaii for field maneuvers, with three B–12s, a C–33 and the Y1–OA–8 providing air- lift. Formation flying and patrolling over Hawaii were prac- ticed by the deployed pilots. The 19th Pursuit did a similar deployment to Hilo in June 1939.208 Though the 18th Wing was becoming more focused in its role as an air force, support to the Army ground forces in Hawaii continued as before. Tow target and searchlight target missions for the 64th Coast Artillery (AA) continued through 1938 and 1939, utilizing B–12, B–18 and OA–8 Loening OA–1C serial number A.C. 28-79 was assigned to the 5th Com- aircraft.209 The 5th Bomb Group also participated in the posite Group and is depicted in Hawaii in 1930. This aircraft was Joint Anti-Aircraft – Air Corps Exercise held November 5- wrecked in surf at Waimanalo, T.H. on September 25, 1931. 16, 1938. 210 On May 18, 1939, the 18th Wing conducted a blackout exercise with the Hawaiian Department. During Coastal Frontier against hostile naval forces. All 5th Bomb the day, 18th Pursuit Group squadrons flying from Bellows Group squadrons saw an increase in instrument flying Field did dive bombing attacks on AAA positions. That training to include ascending and descending through evening, 18th Wing aircraft were airborne when the black- overcast. 200 The reconnaissance squadrons, new to the out alert was given. The aircraft ranged over Oahu, check- long-range overwater mission, witnessed an increase in ing for compliance and any visible light while assessing the training on dead reckoning, search and patrol methods at impact on adversary night operations. 211 sea, combat bombing and gunnery and had their officers Even with their new long range overwater missions to start training as navigators. 201 In May 1938, 5th Bomb train for, the reconnaissance squadrons continued their co- Group navigators were using ships’ weather reports to plan operative work with artillery units on Oahu. In May 1938 and conduct overwater search and interception missions. the 4th and 50th Reconnaissance continued cooperative 202 The Bomb Group’s new skills were put to the test in work with the gun batteries at Fort Kamehameha and that practical exercises. On July 19, 1938, the 23rd Bombard- August worked with the 16-inch guns at Fort Weaver. Both ment used the departing USAT Republic as a target, squadrons also continued their relationship with the 11th squadron B–18s doing an interception problem and finding Field Artillery.212 The 31st Bombardment did an interesting the transport in open ocean twenty four hours after she left air mobility experiment on June 13, 1939, using B–18s to Honolulu. 203 A similar exercise was performed on Septem- carry Co D, 19th Infantry Regiment, from Hickam Field to ber 29, with bombers ranging out 329 miles from Oahu. 204 Burns Field, Kauai. Each bomber carried ten soldiers plus On August 11, 1938, the 23rd Bombardment flew to French equipment in special containers in the bomb bay. 213 The Frigate Shoals with five combat-loaded B–18s. After reach- 18th Pursuit Group also conducted air mobility exercises ing the shoals, the formation circled for 15 minutes then of sorts, using six aircraft to drop aerial delivery containers proceeded to Necker Island for bombing practice before re- of food to a detachment of 21st Infantry Regiment soldiers turning to Hickam Field.205 to demonstrate infantry support in a March 1939 exer- The new training focus in 1938 was codified in the 5th cise.214 The 26th Attack also joined in, playing the role of Bomb Group’s FY40 training plan that started on July 1, adversary air against 35th Infantry soldiers. 215 1939. Training was now planned out three months in ad- Inter-island mass flights continued to provide airmen vance as opposed to one month, and the first three months understanding of their area of responsibility as well as ex- of the year were designated “Regular Practice Season” to perience in overwater navigation. Flights to Hilo, Hawaii knock out all Training Regulation (TR) 440-40 bombing were performed by both 5th Bomb Group squadrons as and gunnery training requirements. Field deployments well as 18th Pursuit Group units, with deployments some- continued as part of the training regime, with squadrons times combined with overnight stops or multi-day training spending two weeks at Bellows doing gunnery and one events.216 These training flights provided the experience week at Morse Field on the southernmost tip of Hawaii for necessary to perform complicated wing-level exercises as bombing training. 206 To accommodate its training schedule, well as joint exercises. On January 25, 1939, the 18th Wing the 5th Bomb Group was assigned six water areas adjacent performed a tactical exercise that started with bomb to islands in the Hawaiian chain for bombing, two anchored squadrons dispersing to airfields on other islands. The re- targets off Oahu and one land target at Morse Field on connaissance squadrons deployed to outlying fields on Hawaii. Five tow target ranges were also set up adjacent Oahu but flew patrols to keep the ‘enemy’ bomber airfields to Oahu for aerial gunnery work.207 under surveillance. Once the bombers launched for a raid, The 18th Pursuit Group had a similar emphasis on the reconnaissance planes trailed the ‘enemy’ force, provid- field exercises. In September 1938, the 19th Pursuit spent ing updates for the 18th Pursuit Group in order for pursuit one week at a Field Training Exercise at Lanai City Air- squadrons to perform an intercept. 217

26 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 The War and Beyond 18th Wing had at last found its role for the future. As architects the Hawaiian airmen developed doctrine By the end of 1939, Hawaii’s air force was a far cry to rapidly move throughout the archipelago, deploying to from its humble beginnings just twenty years earlier.The contingency airfield upon airfield in order to provide mobile air presence on the islands had grown from one squadron defense against hostile powers. Tactics developed to a wing, and two groups now encompassed eight flying during that period could now locate and attack enemy fleets squadrons performing specialized functions. Facilities now as well as shelter Oahu against air and amphibious threats. included two upgraded airfields with room for expansion, Air power ideas, developed during group and wing level ex- a bomber force with front-line aircraft, and pursuit ercises and then tested in joint exercises, delivered on Brig squadrons that were scheduled to be similarly equipped Gen Mitchell’s promise of what air power could deliver – a within a year. Personnel were also flowing in as the Army striking force capable of both offensive and defensive ac- increased its size. 218 And while all of this growth was in- tions. The now robust 18th Wing was the foundational or- deed impressive, the most important outcome was that the ganization that proved able to provide just that. I

NOTES

1. Juliette Hennessy, The United States Army Air Arm, April 1919. Box 3014, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii 1861 to April 1917 – USAF Historical Studies No. 98 (USAF His- Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. torical Division, Research Studies Institute, Air University, 1958), 12. Brigadier General Mitchell, Chief, Training and Operations pp. 84-85. Group. Memorandum to Department Air Service Officer, Hawai- 2. Ibid., pp. 150-51. ian Department. Subject: Policy. April 24, 1919. Box 3031, Entry 3. Ibid., pp. 165, 192; C. Westover, Executive. Memorandum for 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Colonel Gorrell, Office of the Chief of Staff. No subject. November Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA 10, 1919. Box 3031, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; 13. Director of Military Aeronautics. Memorandum to Com- Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, manding Officer, 6th Aero Squadron. Subject: Planes and Motors. NA; Historical Section, Seventh Air Force. Administrative History March 1, 1919. Box 3025, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; of Headquarters Seventh Air Force From 1916 to May 1944. 1 Au- Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, gust 1944. Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 259017, NA; Administrative Branch, Director, Military Aeronautics. Mem- Maxwell AFB, Ala. orandum to Commanding Officer, 6th Aero Squadron, Ford Is- 4. Air Corps Newsletter, August 12, 1932, p. 300. land. No subject. January 9, 1919. Box 3014, Entry 172: Project 5. Major Clark, C.O., 6th Aero Squadron. Memorandum to Chief Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files Signal Officer (Aero Division). Subject: Equipment. January 23, 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 1918. Box 3025, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii 14. Director of Military Aeronautics. Memorandum to Director Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. of Air Service. No subject. April 18, 1919; Chief, Training and Op- 6. Property Division, Office of the Director of Air Service. Mem- erations Group. Memorandum for Supply Group, Transportation orandum to Commanding Officer, 6th Aero Squadron. Subject: Section. No subject. October 30, 1919. Both in Box 3025, Entry Change of Numbers of Flying Boats. October 28, 1918. Box 3025, 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 15. Unknown Air Service Office. Index Sheet to Chief, Training 7. Commanding Officer, 6th Aero Squadron. Memorandum to and Operations Group. Subject: Policy regarding DH-4B Air- Director of Military Aeronautics, Operations Section. Subject: planes. 2 July 1920. Folder 452.1A, Box 3090, Entry 172: Project Coast Defense Target Practice. November 29, 1918. Box 3017, Files – Departments; Philippine Department, Central Decimal Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Major General Mason Patrick, Office Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. of the Chief of Air Service. Memorandum to The Adjutant Gen- 8. Brigadier General Mitchell, Chief, Training and Operations eral. Subject: DH-4 and DH-4B Airplanes, Hawaiian Islands. Oc- Group. Memorandum to Department Air Service Officer, Hawai- tober 3, 1925. Box 3024, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; ian Department. Subject: Aerial Observation for Coast Defense. Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, June 4, 1919. Box 3014, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; NA; Lt Col Leslie MacDill. Memorandum for Colonel John Curry. Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. No subject. December 5, 1919. Box 3025, Entry 172: Project Files 9. Aerial Coast Defense Officer, Operations Division. Memoran- – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917- dum to Chief, Training and Operations Group, Headquarters Air 1938, RG 18, NA Service, No subject, June 26, 1919. Box 508, General Correspon- 16. Captain John Curry, Office D.A.S.O. Memorandum to the Di- dence 1918-1921, General Correspondence 1917-1938, Central rector of Air Service. No subject. July 15, 1920. Box 3013, Entry Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Training and Operations 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Group, Air Service. Memorandum for the Administrative Group. Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. No subject. 16 July 1919. Box 499, General Correspondence 1918- 17. C.T.Menoher. Memorandum for the C.A.S. Subject: Reclama- 1921, General Correspondence 1917-1938, Central Decimal Files tion of Swamps, Ft. Kamehameha, H.T. October 26, 1920. Box 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Air Service Newsletter, September 30, 3013, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Depart- 1919, p. 5. ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA Charles T. 10. Air Service Newsletter, November 29, 1919, p. 3. Menoher. Memorandum for the Director of War Plans Div., Gen. 11. Maj Gen William Kenly, Director of Military Aeronautics. Staff. Subject: Project for location of Balloon and Terrestrial Ob- Memorandum to Director, Air Service. No subject. February 26, servation Stations on Oahu. September 24, 1920; Commanding

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 27 Officer, Ross Field. Memorandum to the Director of Air Service. 27, 1921, p. 12; March 9, 1922, p. 20; March 29, 1922, p. 19. Subject: Companies for Hawaii. February 24, 1920. Both in Box 42. Commanding General, Hawaiian Department. Memoran- 3014, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Depart- dum to The Adjutant General of the Army. No subject. April 27, ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 1922. Box 3014, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii 18. Air Service Newsletter, November 1, 1921, pp. 14-15. Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Ap- 19. Officer in Charge of Aerial Coast Defenses, Training and Op- pendix No. 3 (of what document?). History of Air Service Troops erations Group. Memorandum to Chief Operations Section. Sub- in Hawaiian Department, 1917-1936. No date. Air Force Histori- ject: Progress Report on Aero Coast Defense Project. 25 April cal Research Agency, IRIS 259020, Maxwell AFB, Ala; Air Service 1919. Folder 319.1, Box 3079, Entry 172: Project Files – Depart- Newsletter, April 7, 1922, p. 3. ments; Philippine Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, 43. Lt Col J.E. Fechet, Chief, Training and War Plans Div. Mem- RG 18, NA. orandum to the Supply Division. No subject. July 24, 1922. Box 20. Air Service Newsletter, December 29, 1920, p. 17. 3014, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Depart- 21. C. Westover, Executive. Memorandum for Colonel Gorrell, Of- ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. fice of the Chief of Staff. No subject. November 10, 1919; Director 44. C.A.S. (Chief of Air Service). Synopsis of cable to Air Officer, of Air Service. Memorandum to Director of Army Operations. Sub- 9th C.A.. No subject. May 24, 1923; Headquarters, Hawaiian De- ject: Preparation of Flying Field at Luke Field, Ford’s Island, T.H. partment. Memorandum to The Adjutant General of the Army. December 11, 1919. Both located in Box 3031, Entry 172: Project No subject. May 3, 1923. Both in Box 3024, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 22. Office of Director of Air Service (O.D.A.S.). Memorandum to 45. Maj. George Lovell, Air Service Supply Officer. Memorandum Department Air Service Officer, Honolulu, T.H. Subject: Projects to Maj. Gerald Brant. Subject: Conversion of present Supply Base and Equipment for Hawaii Department. February 20, 1920. Box Honolulu to Air Intermediate Depot status. May 27, 1925. Box 3025, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Depart- 3024, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Depart- ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 23. Operations Division, Training and Operations Group. Mem- 46. Maj. Gen. Summerall, Commander, Hawaiian Department. orandum for Supply Group, Engine and Plane Maintenance Sec- Memorandum for Chief of the Air Service. No Subject. April 30, tion. No subject. May 25, 1920. Box 3025, Entry 172: Project Files 1923. Box 3025, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917- Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 1938, RG 18, NA. 47. Alain Pelletier, “Made in America: Thomas Morse MB-3 and 24. Property Division, Office of the Director of Air Service. Mem- Boeing MB-3A,” Air Enthusiast, Issue 131 (September/October orandum for Chief, Training & Operation Group. No subject. No- 2007), p. 51; Chief of the Air Service Major General Patrick. vember 19, 1920. Box 3025, Entry 172: Project Files – Telegram to Chief of Engineering Division, McCook Field. No sub- Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917- ject. May 24, 1922; Chief, Training and War Plans Division. Mem- 1938, RG 18, NA. orandum for Chief of the Air Service. Subject: Equipment of Air 25. Major General Mason Patrick, Office of the Chief of Air Serv- Service Squadrons in the Hawaii Department. March 3, 1923. ice. Memorandum to The Adjutant General. Subject: DH-4 and Both in Box 3025, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii DH-4B Airplanes, Hawaiian Islands. October 3, 1925. Box 3024, Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Supply Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Officer, Ft Mason, San Francisco. Synopsis of cable to C.A.S. (Chief Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. of Air Service). No subject. 21 April 1923; Rockwell Air Depot. Syn- 26. Air Service Newsletter: November 22, 1919, p. 4; December opsis of cable to Chief of Air Service. No subject. 31 July 1923; both 14, 1920, p. 8. in Folder 452.1A, Box 3090, Entry 172: Project Files – Depart- 27. Various Air Service Newsletters, March-June, Aug, Oct, Dec ments; Philippine Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, 1920 RG 18, NA; Chief, Property Requirements Section, Air Service. 28. Air Service Newsletter: April 20, 1920, p. 17; July 16, 1920, Memorandum to Commanding Officer, Fairfield Intermediate Air p. 20. Depot. Subject: Shipment of Four NBS-1 Airplanes to Hawaii. Feb- 29. Air Service Newsletter: May 1, 1920, p. 21; May 26, 1920, p. ruary 20, 1924; Major General Mason Patrick, Office of the Chief 15; August 7, 1920 p. 2. of Air Service. Memorandum to The Adjutant General. Subject: 30. C.O., Luke Field. Weekly News Items to The A.G.O. July 24, DH-4 and DH-4B Airplanes, Hawaiian Islands. October 3, 1925. 1920. Box 3017, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Both in Box 3024, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Air 31. Air Service Newsletter, November 20, 1920, p. 4. Service Newsletter, January 23, 1923, p. 22. 32. Air Service Newsletter: June 2, 1920, p. 14; July 12, 1920, p.1. 48. Historical Section, Seventh Air Force. Administrative History 33. Air Service Newsletter, October 29, 1920 pp. 15, 19-20. of Headquarters Seventh Air Force From 1916 to May 1944. 1 Au- 34. Air Service Newsletter, November 20, 1920, p. 13. gust 1944. Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 259017, 35. Air Service Newsletter, July 28, 1921, p. 15. Maxwell AFB, Ala. 36. Commanding General, Hawaiian Department. Memoran- 49. Hawaiian Department. History of the Air Corps in the dum to The Adjutant General of the Army. No subject. April 27, Hawaiian Department. No date. Air Force Historical Research 1922. Box 3014, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Agency, IRIS 259016, Maxwell AFB, Ala. Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 50. Organizational History, 19th Fighter Squadron, AAF, From 37. Air Service Newsletter, July 20, 1920, p. 2. Activation to 31 March 1944. No date. Air Force Historical Re- 38. Air Service Newsletter, February 28, 1922, p. 4; O.C.A.S. search Agency, IRIS 55820, Maxwell AFB, Ala. Memorandum to The Adjutant General of the Army. No subject. 51. Eighteenth Pursuit Group. History of Organization. April 5, October 24, 1921. Box 3014, Entry 172: Project Files – Depart- 1929. Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 78040, Maxwell ments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, AFB, Ala; Air Service Newsletter: July 15, 1924, p. 13; May 16, RG 18, NA. 1924, p. 17; October 31, 1924, p. 5. 39. Air Service Newsletter: November 1, 1921, p. 14; November 52. Air Service Newsletter, July 8, 1925, pp. 16-17. 9, 1921, pp. 9-10; November 25, 1921, p. 17; December 2, 1921, pp. 53. Air Service Newsletter: April 30, 1924, p. 19; October 31, 12-13. 1924, pp. 5-6. 40. Air Service Newsletter, November 9, 1921, p. 10. 54. Air Service Newsletter: October 31, 1924, pp. 18-19; January 41. Air Service Newsletter: November 25, 1921, p. 18; December 7, 1925, pp. 1.

28 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 55. Air Service Newsletter, December 18, 1924, p. 19. 11, 1927. Box 3013 Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; 56. Chief of Section. Memorandum to Chief, Supply Division, Of- Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. fice of the Chief of the Air Service. No subject. October 29, 1924. 74. Office of the Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum to The Ad- Box 3024, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii De- jutant General. No subject. October 15, 1927. Box 3031, Entry partment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central 57. Maj. Gen. Mason Patrick, Chief of Air Service. Memorandum Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. to The Adjutant General. Subject: Air Service Officers on Local 75. Major George Lovell, Air Service Supply Officer. Memoran- Joint Planning Committee. June 7, 1924. Box 3013 Entry 172: dum to Major Gerald Brant. Subject: Conversion of present Sup- Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Deci- ply Base Honolulu to Air Intermediate Depot status. May 27, mal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 1925. Box 3024, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii 58. Maj. Gen. Mason Patrick, Chief of Air Service. Memorandum Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Major to Commanding General, Hawaiian Department. Subject: Joint Gerald Brant, War Department Supply Division. Memorandum Maneuver, 1924. June 23, 1924. Box 3017, Entry 172: Project Files for the Chief of Air Service. Subject: War Reserve, Hawaiian De- – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917- partment. June 24, 1925. Box 3014, Entry 172: Project Files – De- 1938, RG 18, NA. partments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 59. Commanding General, Hawaiian Department. Memoran- 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. dum to The Chief of Air Service. Subject: Activity Report for the 76. Air Corps Newsletter: January 7, 1928, p. 24.; July 21, 1931, Month of April, 1925. May 15, 1925. Box 3017, Entry 172: Project p. 260. Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 77. Executive, Training and Operations Division, Office of the 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Chief of Air Corps. Memorandum to Assistant Chief of Air Corps. 60. Air Service Newsletter, May 5, 1925, p. 8. No subject. October 3, 1927. Box 3014, Entry 172: Project Files – 61. Major Gerald Brant, General Staff. Memorandum to Chief Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917- of Air Service. Subject: Report on Air Service participation in Joint 1938, RG 18, NA. Army and Navy Exercise No. 3. June 16, 1925. Box 3016, Entry 78. Air Corps Newsletter, March 15, 1928, p. 112. 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central 79. Air Corps Newsletter: September 23, 1927, p. 287; November Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Air Service Newsletter: 10, 1927, pp. 329-330; October 15, 1927, p. 309; March 15, 1928, March 3, 1925, p. 18; June 22, 1925, pp. 4-5. p. 112; March 31, 1928, p. 131. 62. Pelletier, p. 50-51; Commanding Officer, Luke Field and Fifth 80. Eighteenth Pursuit Group. Unit Histories, 1921-1940. Vari- Composite Group. Memorandum for the Chief of the Air Service. ous Dates. Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 78042, Subject: Reserve Tanks for MB-3A Airplanes. June 4, 1924. Box Maxwell AFB, Ala. 3024, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Depart- 81. Air Corps Newsletter: October 15, 1927, pp. 309-311; Novem- ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. ber 10, 1927, pp. 329-330; 13th Air Force Publications Officer. The 63. Chief, Property Requirements Section. Memorandum to Story of the Fifth Bombardment Group (Heavy). (Commercial Chief, Field Service Section, Supply Division. No subject. January Printing: Raleigh, 1946). Air Force Historical Research Agency, 23, 1925; Contracting Officer. Memorandum to Boeing Airplane IRIS 1043686, Maxwell AFB, Ala. Company. No subject. January 7, 1925. Both in Box 3024, Entry 82. Eighteenth Pursuit Group. Unit Histories, 1921-1940. Vari- 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central ous Dates. Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 78042, Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Maxwell AFB, Ala.; Organizational History, 19th Fighter 64. Air Service Newsletter: May 8, 1926, p. 21; June 8, 1926, pp. Squadron, AAF, From Activation to 31 March 1944. No date. Air 20-21; Lt Col Gillmore, Chief, Supply Division. Memorandum for Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 55820, Maxwell AFB, Ala. The Executive. No subject. December 28, 1925. Box 3024, Entry 83. Air Corps Newsletter, October 17, 1929, p. 369. 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central 84. Air Corps Newsletter: October 15, 1927, p. 311; November Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 10, 1927, pp. 329-330. 65. Hawaiian Department. Extract from Activity Report for the 85. Air Corps Newsletter: December 8, 1927, pp. 366-367; Janu- Month of May, 1926. June 15, 1926. Box 3025, Entry 172: Project ary 7, 1928 pp. 23-24. Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 86. Organizational History, 19th Fighter Squadron, AAF, From 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Activation to 31 March 1944. No date. Air Force Historical Re- 66. Air Service Newsletter, September 22, 1926, p. 18. search Agency, IRIS 55820, Maxwell AFB, Ala. 67. Air Corps Newsletter, January 25, 1927, p. 16. 87. Air Corps Newsletter, June 5, 1928, p. 213; Grover Loening, 68. Air Service Newsletter: June 8, 1926, pp. 20-21; July 9, 1926, Amphibian: The Story of the Loening Biplane (New York Graphic p. 26. Society: Greenwich, 1973), pp. 191-92. 69. Office of the Department Air Officer, Hawaiian Department. 88. 13th Air Force Publications Officer. The Story of the Fifth Memorandum to Chief of Air Service. No subject. July 29, 1926. Bombardment Group (Heavy). (Commercial Printing: Raleigh, Box 3025, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii De- 1946). Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 1043686, partment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA Maxwell AFB, Ala. 70. Air Service Newsletter: September 22, 1926, p. 26; December 89. Material Liaison Section. Memorandum to Chief, Material 31, 1926, p. 15. Division, Air Corps, Wright Field. Subject: Airplanes and Spare 71. Major General Lewis, Commanding General, Hawaiian De- Parts on Cont. W 535 AC 1342. September 3, 1929. Box 3024, partment. Memorandum to The Adjutant General. Subject: Air- Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, plane Radio Equipment. November 3, 1926. Box 3013 Entry 172: Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Deci- 90. Air Corps Newsletter, November 29, 1929, pp. 421-22. mal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 91. Eighteenth Pursuit Group. Unit Histories, 1921-1940. Vari- 72. Brigadier General J. Fechet, Acting Chief of Air Corps. Mem- ous Dates. Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 78042, orandum to The Commanding General, Hawaiian Department. Maxwell AFB, Ala.; Air Corps Newsletter: June 9, 1930, p. 158; No subject. December 17, 1926. Box 3024, Entry 172: Project Files July 2, 1930, p. 197. – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917- 92. Commanding General, Hawaiian Department. Memoran- 1938, RG 18, NA. dum to The Adjutant General. Subject: Report of Minor Army and 73. Air Corps Newsletter: February 17, 1927, p. 46; April 26, 1927, Navy Exercises, June 26 – July 2, 1930. July 28, 1930. Box 3016, p. 119; Air Officer, Hawaiian Department. Memorandum to Brig. Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Gen. Fechet, Assistant Chief of the Air Corps. No Subject. March Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA.

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 29 93. Air Corps Newsletter, September 23, 1930, p. 283. 1921-1940. Various Dates. Air Force Historical Research Agency, 94. C.A.C. (Chief of Air Corps). Synopsis of cable to Air Officer, IRIS 78042, Maxwell AFB, Ala. 9th C.A. No subject. 14 February 1930. Folder 452.1B, Box 3089, 116. Air Corps Newsletter, January 25, 1932, p. 29. Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Philippine Department, 117. Air Corps Newsletter: September 18, 1931, p. 347; January Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 25, 1932, pp. 29-30; August 12, 1932, p. 322. 95. Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum to Air Officer of the 118. Office of the Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum for Chief, Hawaiian Department. No subject. June 25, 1930. Box 3024, Plans Division. No subject. April 2, 1932. Box 3025, Entry 172: Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Deci- Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. mal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 96. General Fechet (Chief of Air Corps). Synopsis of cable to Gen- 119. Air Corps Newsletter, April 8, 1932, pp. 147-150. eral Lassiter, Hawaiian Department. No subject. February 6, 120. Air Corps Newsletter, April 8, 1932, pp. 120-121. 1931. Box 3025, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii 121. Air Corps Newsletter: June 5, 1931, pp. 217-218; July 21, Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Air 1931, pp. 260, 273. Corps Newsletter, November 30, 1932, p. 468. 122. Air Corps Newsletter, January 25, 1932, p. 30. 97. Air Corps Newsletter: October 20, 1930, pp. 306-307; Novem- 123. C.A.C. (Chief of Air Corps) Synopsis of cable to Chief, Mate- ber 14, 1930, p. 338. rial Divn. No subject. 16 July 1932. Folder 452.2 – Amphibians, 98. C.A.C. Synopsis of cable to Press Branch, G-2 War Dept. No Box 3090, Project Files – Departments; Philippine Department, subject. September 15, 1930. Box 3014, Entry 172: Project Files – Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917- 124. Acting Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum to Commander 1938, RG 18, NA. Officer, 18th Composite Wing. No subject. May 26, 1932. Box 3024, 99. History of the Twenty Sixth Attack Squadron. June (?) 1932. Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 43735, Maxwell AFB, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Ala. 125. Hawaiian Department. History of the Air Corps in the 100. Air Corps Newsletter, January 15, 1931, p. 24. Hawaiian Department. No date. Air Force Historical Research 101. Hawaiian Department. History of the Air Corps in the Agency, IRIS 259016, Maxwell AFB, Ala. Hawaiian Department. No date. Air Force Historical Research 126. Air Corps Newsletter: May 3, 1932, p. 171; August 12, 1932, Agency, IRIS 259016, Maxwell AFB, Ala. p. 302. 102. Air Corps Newsletter, July 21, 1931, p. 273; C.A.C. Synopsis 127. Air Corps Newsletter, August 12, 1932, p. 324. of cable to A.G. No subject. June 22, 1931. Box 3014, Entry 172: 128. Air Corps Newsletter, November 30, 1932, p. 469. Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Deci- 129. Chief of Coast Artillery. Memorandum to The Adjutant Gen- mal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA eral. Subject: Ammunition for development work pertaining to 103. Adjutant General. Cable to Hawaii Department. No subject. long range firing against naval targets. January 13, 1931. Box June 25, 1931. Box 3014, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; 3017, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Depart- Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. NA 130. Executive for the Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum to 104. Air Corps Newsletter, July 21, 1931, p. 273. The Adjutant General. Subject: Training for Observation of 16” 105. Air Corps Newsletter, December 8, 1930, p. 374. Gun Firing in Hawaii. December 29, 1931. Box 3017, Entry 172: 106. Air Corps Newsletter, September 18, 1931, pp. 346-347. Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Deci- 107. Air Corps Newsletter: December 8, 1930, p. 375; February mal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Air Corps Newsletter: May 3, 28, 1931, p. 94; March 19, 1931, p. 125; June 5, 1931, p. 218. 1932, p. 188; August 12, 1932, p. 321; November 30, 1932, p. 477. 108. Air Corps Newsletter: September 18, 1931, pp. 347-348; Oc- 131. Eighteenth Pursuit Group. Unit Histories, 1921-1940. Var- tober 17, 1931, pp. 371-372; Eighteenth Pursuit Group. Unit His- ious Dates. Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 78042, tories, 1921-1940. Various Dates. Air Force Historical Research Maxwell AFB, Ala.; Air Corps Newsletter: May 3, 1932, p. 188; Agency, IRIS 78042, Maxwell AFB, Ala. August 12, 1932, p. 321; November 4, 1932, pp. 446-447; Novem- 109. Air Corps Newsletter: February 28, 1931, p. 94; September ber 30, 1932, p. 477; February 24, 1933, p. 48. 18, 1931, p. 348. 132. Air Corps Newsletter: July 19, 1932, p. 270; August 12, 1932, 110. Air Corps Newsletter, March 19, 1931, p. 125. p. 321; August 27, 1932, p. 340. 111. Air Corps Newsletter, June 5, 1931, p. 216. 133. Air Corps Newsletter, August 12, 1932, p. 322. 112. Lt Col Gerald Brant, Commanding Officer, 18th Composite 134. Air Corps Newsletter, March 27, 1933, p. 72. Wing. Memorandum to Commanding General, Hawaiian Depart- 135. Air Corps Newsletter, October 18, 1932, p. 424. ment. Subject: Air Corps Maneuvers, May 19th – 21st, 1931. May 136. Air Corps Newsletter: August 12, 1932, p. 324; October 18, 29, 1931. Box 3017, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; 1932, p. 424; Commander, Luke Field. Memorandum to Com- Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. manding Officer, 18th Composite Wing. Subject: Activity Report 113. Lt Col Gerald Brant, Commanding Officer, 18th Composite for the month of November, 1932. December 10, 1932. Box 3013, Wing. Memorandum to Commanding General, Hawaiian Depart- Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Deci- ment. Subject: Report on Air Corps Tactical Exercise, June 25th mal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. – 26th inclusive. July 14, 1931. Box 3017, Entry 172: Project Files 137. Commanding Officer, 18th Composite Wing. Memorandum – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917- to The Chief of Air Corps. Subject: Annual Report – Air Corps Ac- 1938, RG 18, NA. tivities. July 1, 1932. Box 3013, Project Files – Departments; 114. Lt Col Gerald Brant, Commanding Officer, 18th Composite Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, Wing. Memorandum to Commanding General, Hawaiian Depart- NA; Commander, 18th Composite Wing. Memorandum to Depart- ment. Subject: Report on Air Corps Tactical Exercise, July 7, 1931. ment Surgeon, Hawaiian Department. No subject. July 31, 1931. July 16, 1931. Box 3017, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Box 3024, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii De- Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, partment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. NA; Air Corps Newsletter: September 18, 1931, p. 348; October 138. Air Corps Newsletter, April 28, 1933, p. 89. 17, 1931, p. 371. 139. Office, Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum to Commander 115. 13th Air Force Publications Officer. The Story of the Fifth General, Hawaiian Department. No subject. September 14, 1933. Bombardment Group (Heavy). (Commercial Printing: Raleigh, Box 3013, Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Cen- 1946). Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 1043686, tral Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Maxwell AFB, Ala; Eighteenth Pursuit Group. Unit Histories, 140. Commander, Luke Field. Memorandum to Commanding Of-

30 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 ficer, 18th Composite Wing. Subject: Activity Report for the month ject. April 1, 1936. All in Box 3023, Entry 172: Project Files – De- of November, 1932. December 10, 1932. Box 3013, Project Files – partments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917- Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917- 1938, RG 18, NA. 1938, RG 18, NA. 154. Material Division, Wright Field. Telegram to Commanding 141. Air Corps Newsletter: February 1, 1936, p. 7; April 1, 1935, Officer, San Antonio Depot. No subject. March 10. 1936. Box 3023, p. 152; April 15, 1935, p. 162; May 15, 1935, p. 23. Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, 142. Air Corps Newsletter, February 1, 1936, p. 7. Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Air Corps Newslet- 143. Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG ter, September 15, 1936, pp. 18-19. 18, NA; Commander, Luke Field. Memorandum to Commanding 155. Capt H.W. Holden, Office of the Chief of the Air Corps. Mem- Officer, 18th Composite Wing. Subject: Activity Report for the orandum to Major Spatz. Subject: Observation airplane situation, Third Quarter, Fiscal Year 1933-34. April 8, 1933; Commander, Hawaiian Department. May 15, 1934. Box 3023, Entry 172: Proj- Luke Field. Memorandum to Commanding Officer, 18th Compos- ect Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal ite Wing. Subject: Activity Report, Fourth Quarter, F.Y. 1933. July Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 9, 1933. Both in Box 3013, Project Files – Departments; Hawaii 156. 13th Air Force Publications Officer. The Story of the Fifth Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA Bombardment Group (Heavy). (Commercial Printing: Raleigh, 144. Air Corps Newsletter, July 1, 1935, p. 4; Eighteenth Pursuit 1946). Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 1043686, Group. Unit Histories, 1921-1940. Various Dates. Air Force His- Maxwell AFB, Ala. torical Research Agency, IRIS 78042, Maxwell AFB, Ala. 157. Commander, Hawaiian Department. Memorandum to The 145. Commanding General, Hawaiian Department. Memoran- Adjutant General. Subject: Request for Corps and Army Obser- dum to The Adjutant General. Subject: Flying Hours for Cooper- vation Airplanes. November 20, 1936. Box 3023, Entry 172: Proj- ative Missions, Fiscal Year 1935. May 15, 1934. Assistant ect Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Adjutant General, Hawaiian Department. Memorandum to The Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Adjutant General. Subject: Flying Hours for Cooperative Mis- 158. Office of the Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum to The sions, FY 1935-36. June 15, 1935. Both in Box 3016, Entry 172: Adjutant General. No subject. January 12, 1937. Box 3023, Entry Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Deci- 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central mal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 146. Air Corps Newsletter, February 15, 1936, p. 20. 159. Office of the Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum to The 147. Assistant Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum to Chief, Ma- Adjutant General. No subject. September 30, 1937; C.A.C. (Chief terial Division, Air Corps, Wright Field. Subject: Shortage of Air- of Air Corps). Synopsis of cable to A.G. (Adjutant General?). No planes in the Hawaiian Department. January 31, 1933. Box 3023, subject. May 4, 1938. Both in Box 3023, Entry 172: Project Files Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917- Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 1938, RG 18, NA. 148. Chief of the Air Corps. Telegram to Wright Field. No subject. 160. The Adjutant General. Memorandum to Commanding Gen- June 14, 1934; Major Laurence Stone, Commander, Hawaiian eral, Hawaiian Department. Subject: Redesignation of Air Corps Depot. Memorandum to Chief, Material Division, Wright Field. Units, Hawaiian Department. January 25, 1938. Box 3014, Entry Subject: Report of Status of Airplanes in the Hawaiian Depart- 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central ment. August 31, 1934. Both in Box 3023, Entry 172: Project Files Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Air Corps Newsletter, Au- – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917- gust 1, 1937, p. 21. 1938, RG 18, NA. 161. Commander, 18th Wing. Memorandum to Chief of the Air 149. Assistant Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum to Chief, Ma- Corps. No subject. November 18, 1938. Box 3023, Entry 172: Proj- terial Division, Air Corps, Wright Field. Subject: Shortage of Air- ect Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal planes in the Hawaiian Department. January 31, 1933; Assistant Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum for Deputy Chief of Staff. 162. Commander, Hawaiian Department. Memorandum to The No subject. December 26, 1934. Both in Box 3023, Entry 172: Proj- Adjutant General. Subject: Airplane Situation, Hawaiian Depart- ect Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal ment. November 2, 1936. Box 3023, Entry 172: Project Files – De- Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. partments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 150. Appendix No. 3 (of what document?). History of Air Service 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Air Corps Newsletter: September 15, 1936, Troops in Hawaiian Department, 1917-1936. No date. Air Force pp. 18-19; August 1, 1937, p. 21. Historical Research Agency, IRIS 259020, Maxwell AFB, Ala.; Air 163. Commander, Hawaiian Department. Memorandum to The Corps Newsletter, June 1, 1935, p. 5; Commander, Hawaiian De- Adjutant General. Subject: Officer Personnel – 18th Composite partment. Memorandum to The Adjutant General. Subject: Wing, Air Corps. September 30, 1936. Box 3004, Entry 172: Proj- Funds for Improvement of Bellows Field. December 9, 1936. Box ect Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal 3031, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Depart- Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 164. Air Corps Newsletter, November 15, 1937, p. 25. 151. Air Corps Newsletter: October 1, 1935, p. 7; July 1, 1938, pp. 165. Commander, Hawaiian Department. Memorandum to The 9-10. Adjutant General. Subject: Airplane Situation, Hawaiian Depart- 152. Commander, Hawaiian Depot. Memorandum to Chief, Ma- ment. November 2, 1936. Box 3023, Entry 172: Project Files – De- terial Division, Wright Field. Subject: Report on Status of Air- partments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files planes in the Hawaiian Department. July 31, 1936; Commander, 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Hawaiian Depot. Memorandum to Chief, Material Division, 166. Commanding General, 18th Composite Wing. Memorandum Wright Field. Subject: Report on Status of Airplanes in the to Brigadier General H.H. Arnold, Assistant Chief of the Air Hawaiian Department. August 31, 1936; Both in Box 3023, Entry Corps. No subject. June 5, 1937. Box 3016, Entry 172: Project Files 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917- Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Air Corps Newsletter, June 1938, RG 18, NA; Air Corps Newsletter, June 1, 1937, p. 8. 15, 1936, p. 19. 167. Air Corps Newsletter, May 1, 1938, pp. 9-10; Colonel Millard 153. Unknown, likely Office of the Chief of Air Corps. Synopsis Harmon, Commander, 5th Bomb Group. Memorandum to Brig of cable to Wright Field. No subject. August 18, 1936; C.A.C. (Chief Gen H.H. Arnold, Office of the Chief of Air Corps. No subject. May of Air Corps). Synopsis of cable to Commanding General, GHQ 7, 1938. Box 3014, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Air Force, Langley. No subject. October 22, 1936. Chief of the Air Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Corps. Telegram to Chief, Material Division, Wright Field. No sub- 168. Army Operating Defense Plans – Hawaiian Coastal Fron-

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 31 tier. Operations Orders, 18th Pursuit Group. 1938. Air Force His- 3014, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Depart- torical Research Agency, IRIS 78080, Maxwell AFB, Ala. ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 169. Eighteenth Pursuit Group. Unit Histories, 1921-1940. Var- 189. Air Corps Newsletter, February 1, 1939, p. 4. ious Dates. Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 78042, 190. Air Corps Newsletter, November 1, 1939, p. 8. Maxwell AFB, Ala.; Air Corps Newsletter, September 15, 1936, 191. Material Division, Wright Field. Memorandum to Chief of pp. 18-19. the Air Corps. No subject. 6 February 1936. Folder 452.1C, Box 170. Air Corps Newsletter, December 1, 1937, p. 23. 3089, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Philippine Depart- 171. Air Corps Newsletter: October 1, 1935, pp. 11-12; February ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 15, 1936, p. 17; Eighteenth Pursuit Group. Unit Histories, 1921- 192. Commander, Hawaiian Depot. Memorandum to Chief, Ma- 1940. Various Dates. Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS terial Division, Wright Field. Subject: Report on Status of Air- 78042, Maxwell AFB, Ala. planes in the Hawaiian Department. December 4, 1937. Box 3023, 172. Air Corps Newsletter: January 15, 1938, p. 20; December 1, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, 1938, p. 6. Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Air Corps Newslet- 173. Air Corps Newsletter: January 15, 1937, p. 8; March 1, 1937, ter, March 1, 1938, p. 6. p. 19; July 15, 1938, p. 14. 193. Eighteenth Pursuit Group. Unit Histories, 1921-1940. Var- 174. Air Corps Newsletter, August 15, 1936, p. 20. ious Dates. Air Force Historical Research Agency, IRIS 78042, 175. Chief of Air Corps. Memorandum to Commanding General, Maxwell AFB, Ala. GHQ Air Force, Langley Field, VA. Subject: Airplanes to Hawaii 194. Chief of the Air Corps. Radiogram to the Commanding Gen- and Philippine Departments. 22 October 1936. Folder 452.1C, Box eral, Hawaii Department. No subject. 21 June 1938. Folder 3089, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Philippine Depart- 452.1C, Box 3089, Project Files – Departments; Philippine De- ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA; Air Corps partment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Newsletter, November 15, 1937, p. 25. 195. Commander, Hawaiian Air Depot. Memorandum to Chief, 176. Assistant Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum to Brig. Gen. Material Division, Wright Field. Subject: Report on Status of Air- Barton Yount. No subject. November 15, 1937. Box 3003, Entry planes in the Hawaiian Department. October 3, 1938. Box 3023, 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 177. Assistant Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum for Brig. Gen 196. Chief of Air Corps. Radiogram to Air Officer, Ninth Corps Barton Yount, Wing Commander, Ft Shafter, Hawaii. No subject. Area, Presidio of San Francisco. No subject. January 27, 1938. December 10, 1937. Box 3013, Project Files – Departments; Box 3023, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii De- Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. partment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 178. Office of the Chief of the Air Corps. Memorandum to The 197. Air Corps Newsletter, April 1, 1938, p. 17. Adjutant General. No subject. January 12, 1937. Box 3023, Entry 198. Westover (Chief of Air Corps). Synopsis of cable to A.G. (Ad- 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central jutant General?). No subject. June 9, 1938; Acting Chief of the Air Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. Corps. Memorandum to Commander, 18th Wing. No subject. Sep- 179. Air Corps Newsletter, December 1, 1937, p. 23. tember 20, 1938; Commander, Hawaiian Air Depot. Memorandum 180. Major General Drum, Commanding General, Hawaiian De- to Chief, Material Division, Wright Field. Subject: Report on Status partment. Memorandum to The Adjutant General. Subject: of Airplanes in the Hawaiian Department. October 3, 1938; all in Change of Status of the Hawaiian Air Depot. April 27, 1935. Box Box 3023, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Depart- 3014 Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Depart- ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 199. Air Corps Newsletter: May 1, 1938, p. 14; May 15, 1938, pp. 181. Report of Civilian Employees, Air Corps, Hawaiian Depart- 5, 10; June 1, 1938, pp. 12, 15, 19; December 1, 1938, p. 6. ment. August 31, 1936. Box 3007 Entry 172: Project Files – De- 200. Air Corps Newsletter, February 15, 1939, p. 13. partments; Hawaii Department, Central Decimal Files 201. Air Corps Newsletter: February 1, 1939, p. 4; March 1, 1938, 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. p. 6. 182. Air Corps Newsletter, September 15, 1937, p. 24. 202. Air Corps Newsletter, July 15, 1938, p. 14. 183. Hawaiian Air Depot. Memorandum to Major General West- 203. Air Corps Newsletter, September 1, 1938, p. 4. over, Chief of the Air Corps. No Subject. October 11, 1937. Box 204. Air Corps Newsletter, November 1, 1938, p. 15. 3014 Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Depart- 205. Air Corps Newsletter, September 15, 1938, p. 8. ment, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 206. Air Corps Newsletter, September 15, 1939, p. 12. 184. Air Corps Newsletter: October 1, 1937, p. 9; December 1, 207. Air Corps Newsletter: September 15, 1939, p. 3; October 15, 1937, p. 8. 1939, p. 13. 185. Air Corps Newsletter: February 1, 1938, p. 13; March 15, 208. Air Corps Newsletter, July 1, 1939, p. 9. 1938, p. 6; 31st Bombardment Squadron. Historical Supplement, 209. Air Corps Newsletter: March 1, 1938, p. 6; May 1, 1939, p. 7; 26 June 1917 to 1 January 1944. Air Force Historical Research September 15, 1939, p. 12. Agency, IRIS 43823, Maxwell AFB, Ala. 210. Air Corps Newsletter, January 1, 1939, p. 9. 186. Assistant Chief of Staff. Memorandum for the Adjutant Gen- 211. Air Corps Newsletter, June 15, 1939, pp. 5, 15. eral. Subject: Airplanes for Hawaiian Department. January 31, 212. Air Corps Newsletter: May 15, 1938, p. 10; June 1, 1938, p. 1938. Box 3023, Entry 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii 19; June 15, 1938, pp. 16, 19; October 1, 1938, p. 16. Department, Central Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 213. Air Corps Newsletter, August 15, 1939, p. 8. 187. The Adjutant General. Memorandum to Commanding Gen- 214. Air Corps Newsletter, April 1, 1939, p. 6. eral, Hawaiian Department. Subject: Redesignation of Air Corps 215. Air Corps Newsletter, June 1, 1939, p. 5. Units, Hawaiian Department. January 25, 1938. Box 3014, Entry 216. Air Corps Newsletter: August 1, 1938, p. 12; April 1, 1939, p. 172: Project Files – Departments; Hawaii Department, Central 6; May 1, 1939, p. 14; October 15, 1939, p. 6. Decimal Files 1917-1938, RG 18, NA. 217. Air Corps Newsletter, March 1, 1939, p. 13. 188. The Adjutant General. Memorandum to Commanding Gen- 218. Air Corps Newsletter: October 15, 1939, p. 7; November 15, eral, Hawaiian Department. No subject. September 16, 1938. Box 1939, p. 16.

32 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 Turncoat and Traitor? Lt. Martin Monti (USAAF)

Kenneth P. Werrell

Sergeant Martin J. Monti

he public prefers its history in a heroic fashion on the side of the “good guys.” In that vein World War II is remem- bered as the war that rallied the American people behind a common effort and that had clear-cut villains and clean-cut heroes. Certainly it was an episode of the “good guys versus the bad guys.” For most Americans remember thatT war as the model war – the kind of war with which Americans are most at ease: a popular and successful crusade. If there ever was one, this was “a good war.” Thus, little attention is focused on American military misbehavior, specifically that of deserters, defectors, and traitors. Certainly desertion has been a problem in a number of American wars. However, compared to the millions of men and women who have worn this country’s uniform, less than 10 percent deserted, and of these, only a handful became defectors and traitors. The case of Lt. Martin Monti touches on these elements of defection and treason and is the focus of this essay. But first it is appropriate to review similar cases to provide context. I have limited this overview to instances of de- fection by individuals serving in the military.

Context

Although small in numbers these defections have occurred in most, if not all, American wars. The most notorious was the treason of Benedict Arnold during the American Revolution, a sad story of one of Washington’s best generals trying to sellout his country. In the Mexican war a number of deserters joined the Mexican army.1 Most were immigrants, as many as 700, mainly from Ireland although other national groups were represented, serving in a unit known as the Saint Patrick’s Battalion.2 They saw action in the major battles of that war in which they fought well and were, and are, regarded and better known, as heroes in Mexico and Ireland. Some eight-five were captured at the battle of Churubusco, seventy-two were tried, con- victed, and initially sentenced to death. There was an uproar at these verdicts and General Winfield Scott pardoned five and reduced the sentences of others so that about fifty were executed. Those with reduced sentences received fifty lashes, were jailed, and branded on the face with the letter “D.”3 Defectors were also seen in the Civil War. In 1862, Col. J. A. Mulligan sought permission to enlist Confederate prisoners of war for service in the Federal army. By October he had enrolled some 228 men. They were to serve on the western fron- tier to maintain order and defend against Indian raids, and were promised that they would not fight Confederates. They had only to take an oath of allegiance to the U. S. and were called “galvanized Yankees.” In 1864, the program was expanded

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 33 to field six regiments with some 6,000 men. The Union Navy enlisted some 400 Confederate prisoners. The miser- able conditions in the prison camps and the high mortality rates were the major inducements to change sides. Al- though none of these men engaged their former comrades, the “galvanized Yankees” allowed Federal troops to be transferred from the west into the fighting in the east.4 America’s brief and successful war with Spain at the end of the 19th century was followed by a much more dif- ficult and brutal conflict against Filipinos fighting for their independence. There were problems of motivation through- out the army due to the tough physical conditions in a dif- ficult anti-guerrilla campaign. In addition, some troops saw the conflict as imperialistic, while in the ranks of the black units racism in the American army and society created sympathy for the insurgents. Among American forces were over 6,000 black regular army and volunteers in segre- gated units.5 A majority of the secondary sources write that fifteen to thirty black soldiers defected to the rebel’s forces.6 The most famous (infamous) of these was David Fagan who gained fame as a rebel officer for his bravery, audacity, and flamboyance.7 He led many attacks and his prominence was acknowledged with a $600 dead or alive reward. Twenty captured defectors were sentenced to death, two of whom were executed,8 however Fagan was never caught. Instead a Philippine hunter presented American authori- ties with a bag containing the decomposed head of a black man and a number of items known to have belonged to Fagan. However, there are those who believe this was a Lt. Martin J. Monti. ruse and Fagan peacefully lived out his days.9 I have found no evidence of this sort of misbehavior in World War I, and only three cases in World War II. One of as the government argued, or was he a confused, psycho- these is the subject of this essay. The second involved John logically distraught and sexually misguided soldier placed D. Provoo, who as a teenager became a Buddhist and began in a horrible set of circumstances.”12 to study Japanese.10 In 1940, he went to Japan to further The investigations continued for literally years, 1949 study the Japanese religion and the language. He returned to 1952, after which his trial in civilian court began that to the U. S. after seven months. In May 1941, he enlisted lasted from October 1952 until February 1953. It focused in the army, was sent to the Philippines, and was captured on Provoo’s homosexuality and that few of his peers liked on Corregidor.11 Provoo’s language skills proved useful to him and believed that he was a traitor. On February 12, the Japanese and allowed Provoo to gain special treatment. 1953 he was found guilty of betraying the U.S. and sen- Most serious of the allegations against him was that he tenced to a life term and a $10,000 fine. Provoo was the bore responsibility for the execution of an army captain eighth American citizen convicted of treason after the war. with whom he had a conflict. The Japanese took Provoo to The judge stated that he spared Provoo’s life due to a mit- Tokyo where he made a number of propaganda broadcasts. igating condition of “great emotional instability.”13 However After the war he was investigated but not charged for his an Appeals Court unanimously overturned that verdict. It wartime conduct. He was granted an honorable discharge found the venue improper and that the focus on Provoo’s in April 1946 and reenlisted in September. Then in June homosexuality was irrelevant, inflammatory, and prejudi- 1949, he was discharged and immediately arrested by the cial, meant to humiliate and degrade. However it did hold FBI on charges of homosexuality. There were further in- that a second trial was in order. This was conducted start- vestigations, but no trial. As one author has written, the ing in November 1954 and concluded in March 1955 when question was “Had Provoo joined the Japanese voluntarily, the judge threw the case out due to the long delays and long incarceration (five years in prison). In October 1955, the Supreme Court upheld that opinion. Provoo died a free Kenneth P. Werrell earned degrees from the USAF Academy man in August 2001.14 and Duke University and taught history at Radford Uni- Dale H. Maple was the third American World War II versity. He has lectured at both U.S. and foreign military defector. A brilliant individual, he graduated from high schools and authored numerous articles and several books school at age fifteen, from Harvard at nineteen, and had on aviation history, the most recent of which is Death from mastered a dozen or two languages according to three the Heavens: A History of Strategic Bombing. sources. Yet he exhibited a near fatal flaw, his enthusiasm

34 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 for Nazi Germany. This caused him grief at Harvard and McKinley Nolan deserted in November 1967, two in the army. He was assigned to the 620th Engineer Gen- weeks short of completing his second Vietnam tour. Some eral Service Company along with 200 other men suspected explain his motivation as his opposition to the war, his of similar positive sympathies for Germany. The men of the sympathies for the Vietnamese people, and his reaction to unit became friendly with German prisoners that worked racism. Another explanation is that he was caught stealing in their Colorado army camp. Maple went one step further, military supplies and selling them on the black market. In in February 1944, he helped two prisoners escape and with any event, he worked with the Communists producing them headed south toward Mexico. The trio made it to broadcasts and leaflets in which he urged fellow blacks to Mexico, but were turned over to American authorities. lay down their weapons and join the revolution. He was In April 1944, Maple was court-martialed and charged also seen in a North Vietnamese uniform carrying a gun. with desertion and aiding the enemy, capital offenses. The common view is that he was killed by the Khmer Found guilty of both charges, he was sentenced to death by Rouge in Cambodia where he had been living a simple life. hanging. However, President Roosevelt reduced the sen- However, in light of an apparent/possible sighting of Nolan tence to ten years imprisonment. Maple was released short in 2005, that led to the making of a documentary film (“The of that sentence in February 1951. He died in May 2001.15 Disappearance of McKinley Nolan”), there is a counter At the end of the Korean War a number of American view.21 soldiers shocked the country when they elected not to re- The most recent case of misbehavior involved Bowe turn to the U. S. but instead chose to remain in Communist Bergdahl who left his post in Afghanistan on June 30, China. The experience of U.N. captives in Communist’s 2009, was captured by the Taliban, and held captive for five prisons was very bad with an overall death rate of about years. On May 31, 2014 he was exchanged for five top Tal- 40 percent.16 Again, as to be expected under such harsh iban prisoners. His conduct and the prisoner swap that conditions, not all prisoners performed well. Some estimate brought him home ignited a furious controversy. The that as many as one-third of the prisoners collaborated Obama administration celebrated and praised the recently with their captors, and that one-seventh were considered released prisoner with a White House Rose Garden cere- guilty of “serious collaboration.” This included signing false mony with Bergdahl’s parents on the day of the exchange confessions, making propaganda radio broadcasts, lectur- and the following day Susan Rice, National Security Advi- ing fellow inmates, and acts considered “aiding the enemy.” sor, asserted that Bergdahl had served with “honor and dis- Some went further, informing on, stealing from, and beat- tinction.” There was a public and press pushback on this ing fellow prisoners. As a result, after their return 500 for- episode. mer prisoners were investigated for misconduct and Certainly the army had a different view. Although an fourteen were court-martialed.17 (Early discharge pre- army investigation recommended against punishment, the vented court-martial proceedings against others.) army court-martialed Bergdahl.22 He was charged with de- In the postwar exchange of prisoners, initially twenty- sertion to shirk important or hazardous duty and misbe- three Americans and one Briton refused to return home. havior before the enemy by endangering his unit. After a 90-day period, two of the Americans changed their Conviction of the latter charge could result in a life sen- minds, leaving twenty-one to live in China.18 Eventually tence. The soldier’s case was not helped by evidence that all but one who remained in China and three or so who set- he was critical of the war and America. Just three days be- tled in Europe, returned to the U.S. The reasons advanced fore his desertion he had emailed his parents writing that to explain their actions varied from man to man but in- “I am ashamed to even be an American” and that the army cluded, acceptance of communism, fear of punishment, per- is an “army of liars, backstabber, fools, and bullies.”23 Cer- sonal background, and opportunity.19 tainly a factor in his conduct was Bergdahl’s mental health; At the end of the Vietnam War in 1973, when 561 an army sanity board reported he had a severe mental dis- American prisoners returned to the U.S., two did not. One ease or defect. Nevertheless they opined that Bergdahl of these was a Marine, Robert Garwood, captured by the “was able to appreciate the nature and quality and wrong- Viet Cong on September 28, 1965 and returned to the U. S. fulness of his conduct.”24 However, the army knew this in March 1979. In a long court-martial (August 1980 to prior to this incident and had granted him a mental health February 1981) Garwood was charged with severe offenses. waiver.25 The most serious involved a July 1968 firefight during Bergdahl stated that he was going to the next Ameri- which a Marine reconnaissance team engaged an enemy can post to report misconduct in his unit and intended to unit that included a Caucasian, who the team identified as quickly return. An army report found no evidence of mis- Garwood. American prisoners also testified that Garwood conduct during his imprisonment. Further the investiga- guarded, interrogated, and lectured them. He was seen in tion’s head testified that there was no evidence that an enemy uniform with a gun. Although the court-martial Bergdahl was sympathetic to the Taliban or intended to found him not guilty of the more serious charges, it did find desert. He concluded that imprisonment would be inappro- him guilty of collaboration and assaulting a prisoner. He priate. An army review agreed on this and that a punitive received a sentence of a reduction in grade from PFC to discharge was also inappropriate. But higher authority re- Private, forfeiture of pay and allowances, and a dishonor- jected these recommendations. After President Barak able discharge, but no prison time, which in view of the al- Obama turned down a pardon petition and the system re- legations seems mild.20 jected the claim of command influence, that is, the public

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 35 A U.S. P–38, dressed in Nazi markings. statement by President-elect Donald Trump that Bergdahl peasants, worked his way south. For six weeks he was on was a “dirty rotten traitor” prejudiced a fair trial, Bergdahl the road, getting through the Brenner Pass and moving to- plead guilty to desertion and misbehavior before the wards Switzerland. Near the end of April 1945, just as the enemy. On November 13, 2017, he was sentenced to demo- war was ending, he made it to Milan and awaited the ar- tion to private, a dishonorable discharge, and a $10,000 rival of Allied ground forces.28 fine. There would be no jail time.26 Monti’s interrogation was standard for all Allied air- men shot down during the war and had escaped from cap- Martin J. Monti: World War II Traitor or Fool? tivity. He went through the same routine as a matter of course. That is until the next day when he was arrested in A third individual who seriously misbehaved in U. S. the Red Cross Officers’ Club in Bari, the charges were vio- military service during World War II was Army Air Forces lations of the 58th and 94th Articles of War: desertion and Second Lieutenant Martin J. Monti. Unique in this case misappropriation of a P–38.29 was the fact that Monti was an officer.27 What follows is the Under these changed circumstances, Monti elaborated story of an American army officer and his escapades late on his experience. He told the investigating officers that he in the war. had left Florida in August 1944, and arrived about five On May 13, 1945, only a week after the German sur- days later in Karachi (present day Pakistan), where he was render, Second Lieutenant Martin J. Monti was inter- put into a pilot pool awaiting assignment. Having been idle viewed by American forces following his return from for six weeks, he left Karachi and attempted to get to the enemy-controlled territory. Monti stated he was a member European Theater to join his friends and comrades and to of the 97th Fighter Squadron, 83d Fighter Group shot fight the war. He hitchhiked aboard military aircraft that down on his first mission to Milan, Italy, on October 13, touched down at Abadan, Cairo, Tripoli, and finally Naples. 1944. The airman related how German flak set one engine From there Monti got a ride to Foggia where a number of on fire and knocked out the other, forcing him to bail out. his friends were assigned to the 82d Fighter Group, a P– He told how he was immediately captured by the Germans, 38 outfit. He asked the unit commander to let him join, but jailed, interrogated, and housed for several days near was rebuffed. On his return from this visit, he stopped at Verona with another pilot who he thought was named Pomigliano airfield and spoke to some mechanics who told Smith. Monti described being taken to Germany and trans- him that a P–38 needed a test hop. Since he had not flown ferred to a number of prison camps. During one of these in weeks, Monti explained that he was unable to resist the transfers he was able to escape and, with the aid of some temptation and took the aircraft up without proper, in fact

36 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 A U.S. P–38, dressed in Nazi markings being rolled into the shelter. without any, authorization. He easily got the brand-new The Army conducted a second interview with Monti Lightning into the air,30 flew over the front lines, and then ten days later. At first Monti was reluctant to talk with the got lost. The aircraft was hit by flak, disabling one engine, agent, citing his rights and asking how long he would be forcing him to bail out near Milan. He then repeated his held before charges were filed against him. Nevertheless, earlier story of his captivity, escape, and return. the agent was able to get Monti to repeat his story and add Only a few additional details emerged from this inter- a few more details. He recalled that while imprisoned in view. Monti was able to recall the name of only one Ameri- Verona, he was joined by a B–24 pilot from Texas by the can in the prison camp with him, a Sam Sorokin from North name of Jones. Monti again mentioned Sam Sorokin, but Figuroa Street in Los Angeles. The agent also learned that could not recall any other names. He explained that he pur- Monti had been in Italy for six months in 1938-39, mostly posefully did not learn any names as he had been briefed in Naples, but traveled to other parts of the country, includ- on numerous occasions not to remember the names of ing Milan. The purpose of the trip was to help a great aunt those helping escaped fliers. (This policy was to protect who was coming to the United States. civilians in German occupied territory, not the escapees.) The agent was struck by a number of inconsistencies Monti “admitted his story sounded extraordinary,” but that in Monti’s account, but reached no firm conclusions. He re- it was the truth and he could not change it to make it ported: sound better.32 The Army interviewed a number of individuals in its There are many improbabilities but no impossibilities in investigation of this case. One of Monti’s friends, Second subject’s story. Getting hit by flak in a single P–38 is not im- Lieutenant Marvin E. Andrews, told the authorities that possible; being helped by Germans and Austrians (farmers) during his trip to Italy, Monti looked up Andrews and told for two months is difficult to believe, but it could be done, him that he had been transferred to Italy. Monti tried to that in all this time he is missed by the Allied escape un- get a transfer to Andrews’ P–38 unit, but the commander derground is also not impossible, that he comes through would not go along with that proposal. The next day An- Treviso, which is on the east side of Italy and goes to Milan drews flew Monti to Pomigliano, and that was the last time instead of heading due south for the nearest Allied army he saw him. Andrews went on to say that Monti’s family might be explained by the contingencies of travel by one who was from Genoa, Italy, but that Monti could not speak Ital- must not be seen. ian. Finally he recalled Monti saying he had not flown in over three months and “was itching to get his hands on a The agent concluded that these doubts were serious, but plane again.” A month after Monti’s disappearance, An- might be cleared up if Sorokin could confirm at least part of drews received a letter from Monti wherein he wrote of his the story. The agent also noted that Monti did not try to con- disgust with both the U. S. and his military future as there ceal his identity either when he took off or returned. 31 were “thousands” of pilots without assignments in the pilot

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 37 that Monti seemed to have less self-control than the aver- age man, but “not enough variation from normal to make a psychiatric diagnosis.” A few months later Monti wrote his parents and related a somewhat different story of his session with the psychiatrist, stating that his “psycho tests” went pretty good. In his words: “I have a trace of psychopa- thy which, as it was explained, meant I was inclined not to stay in one place so well as the Army desires. The doc’s rec- ommendation was that I be sent to the States and dis- charged.”36 A psychological diagnosis in 1948 recorded no psychosis or mental defect, but did indicate a psychopathic personality with paranoid and obsessive compulsive fea- tures.37 On August 4, 1945, Monti was tried before a general court-martial in Naples for violation of two articles of war: that he deserted his unit in India; and had “wrongfully, knowingly and willfully misappropriated one P–38-type aircraft.” Monti plead not guilty to both charges. The wit- nesses backed up what they had already told the authori- ties without much trouble. (One exception was a leading witness, a British airman in the operations room when the P–38 was taken, who at first could not identify Monti, but instead embarrassingly pointed to an investigator of the accused.) One clarification, perhaps, came from the man who had told the authorities of Monti’s comment on faking engine problems and flying to Switzerland. He admitted this conversation took place during a bull session, perhaps muffling the impact of that statement. The government did confirm that Private Sorokin was a prisoner-of-war, but ap- parently could not locate him, as nothing was added on Martin Monti being escorted in the courtroom. that score. Monti testified on his own behalf. He claimed that he pool.”33 In late December 1944, Monti sent a letter to his left India because of the inactivity there, a desire to join parents that indicated he was a prisoner of war in Stalag his buddies, and the urge to get into combat. He repeated 3D. Monti’s prisoner status was confirmed by the govern- his story and summed up by stating: “I went too far and ment in May.34 stuck my neck out a little too far and was shot down.” This One officer that had known Monti both stateside and time he mentioned that the bomber pilot’s name that he in India, said that Monti was an Italian-type in appearance met in Verona was Smith, not Jones. He explained away and spoke Italian and Swiss fluently, had friends in Italy, his Swiss comment by claiming that he said it jokingly and and knew girls in Switzerland. More seriously, he men- that it was a common expression. He admitted what he did tioned that Monti “avowed that he would fly over Switzer- was legally wrong, but that his “only purpose was to get land, bail out with a distress signal, and be reported into action and be able to do some good for the country and missing in action.” According to this officer, Monti was bit- fly as soon as I could.” The court-martial trial lasted two ter about being in the Army and against U.S. participation days, and found Monti guilty of two charges. The desertion in the war. The officer recalled that Monti “claimed that we charge, however, was changed to the less-serious one of ab- were misled and that propaganda was as responsible for sence without leave (AWOL). Nevertheless, Monti was sen- our being in the war as it was for the German people. He tenced to dishonorable discharge and fifteen years at hard stated on occasions that the Italian and German people labor.38 were as much in the right as we were.” After Monti disap- Meanwhile stateside, the Monti family was working peared, the officer received a letter from a mutual friend the political angles. By September 1, General Harry who wrote that Monti had shown up in Italy, secured a P– Vaughan’s office—Vaughan was an aide to the president 38, took off and disappeared. He believed that Monti and one of Truman’s political cronies—received a cry for headed for Switzerland to get out of the fighting. “I do not help from Monti’s father. The senior Monti also contacted believe he would sell out to the Germans,” the officer his congressman who wrote to President Truman that his stated, “but he was so queer and strange that he might well son’s sentence was too harsh. The younger Monti added to do this.”35 the pressure on the government by claiming mistreatment Monti was examined by a psychiatrist in July 1945, of prisoners sentenced by court-martial and confined in who opined that the lieutenant was legally sane, entirely Italy. He wrote that the men were so hungry that they fre- rational, friendly, and cooperative. He did note, however, quently ate from garbage cans; that one man died of pneu-

38 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 monia after being doused with water every hour; and an- mans. He insisted that the Germans made subtle threats other hanged himself awaiting review of his court-martial. that convinced him to cooperate with them. Monti admit- These allegations, along with Monti’s version of events ted making fifteen to twenty broadcasts and writing six of were published in a stateside newspaper early the next them, but asserted that he was attempting to reveal to year. It is probably no accident that in short order favorable American authorities the effectiveness of their bombing. action was taken for the convicted man. On February 4, He also said that he joined the S.S. to get out of Berlin be- 1946, Monti’s sentence was remitted on the provision that fore the Soviets arrived.44 he enlist in the Army.39 Monti complied and served in the enlisted ranks at Who was Martin Monti? Eglin Field, Florida. On January 26, 1948, he was mus- tered out with a general discharge under honorable condi- Born in October 1921, he stood 6 feet, 1 and ½ inches, tions at Mitchel Field, New York. This was not the end of weighed 160 pounds in 1944, but 180 pounds at an Army the case, however, for within minutes he was arrested by physical shortly after his trial. The Army identified him as FBI agents. The charge was treason.40 having straight brown hair and brown eyes. His German interrogator described him as tall, dark haired, good look- The Charge was Treason ing, with brilliant teeth. He was a little clumsy perhaps, but not shy or embarrassed and a good speaker, firm and As strange as Monti’s original story might appear, the frank. Raised in a respected St. Louis family, he was one of tale that now emerged was even more bizarre. The gov- five sons (the other four served in the Navy during the war) ernment asserted that Monti flew the P–38 to Vienna and two daughters. His father was an investment broker. where he surrendered to the Germans and then worked During his upbringing, Martin Monti spent his time read- for them. Perhaps the most damning was the testimony of ing religious, isolationist, and anti-New Deal literature and Monti’s German interrogator, who testified that the air- developed a strong, if not fanatical, view that the Soviet man made clear from the outset that he was a defector, Union was enemy of the U. S. and became a vehement Roo- not a prisoner, by writing “Landed deliberately” on an in- sevelt hater. Along with his father, he attended meetings terrogation questionnaire. He stated that Monti also vol- of the prewar isolationist America First Committee. He unteered to fly and fight against the Russians. Monti was strongly influenced by Father Charles Coughlin, a pop- insisted he “wanted to fight the Bolsheviks, not the Ger- ular radio personality, an anti-Semite who espoused fascist mans,” but also added that he would “not undertake any- policies. When he reported for service as a flying cadet in thing detrimental to the interests of the USA.” He told the February 1943, Monti believed that the United States was German that the U.S. would eventually realize that Russia on the wrong side in the war.45 was America’s real enemy and that Germany was an ally. The man who connected the flier to his stint as a Ger- The Germans were unaccustomed to such requests and man propagandist was a Department of Justice official, suspected a trick.41 Victor Woerheide, who ironically had also lived in St. Louis. These suspicions may explain why Monti did not get a He was tracing cases of Americans who made broadcasts chance to fight against the Soviets, but instead made nu- for the Germans, and in 1946, concluded that Wiethaupt merous radio broadcasts for the German overseas short- was Monti. After a minor snag of jurisdiction was resolved wave propaganda office under the name of Martin between the Army and the Department of Justice, the lat- Wicthaupt, which was his mother’s family name. (The use ter called Monti to testify against an alleged radio traitor. of an alias may explain why the American authorities did After a second interview, Monti hired a lawyer and stated not know of Monti’s treasonous activities when he was orig- that he was forced to make the broadcasts because of Nazi inally court-martialed.) This job did not work out too well threats. Nevertheless, Monti was indicted and accused of perhaps because Monti was reluctant to talk against Amer- twenty-one overt acts of treason, to which he plead not ica or perhaps because Monti was “inarticulate,” as a later guilty. At the request of his defense counsel, he was put into writer noted. After delivering fifteen to twenty broadcasts, a mental hospital for three week’s observation, where the he was sent to Hungary to see the damage caused by the doctors concluded that Monti was psychotic with paranoid advancing Red Army. traits, but legally sane. He then went off to an S.S. detachment in a German Legal action against Monti was pushed by a November lieutenant’s uniform supposedly as a leader in the Ameri- 1947, Washington Post newspaper gossip column that laid can contingent, consisting of American prisoners of war, of out the case against Monti. In it, Drew Pearson asked why the German Foreign Legion to fight the Soviets.42 (He was Monti’s “case, for some strange reason, has been bottled up wearing the German uniform when he reached Allied in the War and Justice Departments for months.” 46 Three lines.) Monti never got to the Front, but did convince the months later Monti was arrested. Germans to give him permission to visit his sick grand- The government prepared a powerful case and mother in Italy.43 planned to present one hundred witnesses to the jury, of By late 1947, Monti had modified his story somewhat. whom thirty or so were Germans. Then, as the trial was He now claimed his aircraft was running out of fuel when about to begin in January 1949, Monti pleaded guilty to he landed at what he thought was an abandoned airfield the charges. Due to the seriousness of the crimes, and the in Allied territory, but it turned out to be held by the Ger- special requirements for treason cases, the judge ordered

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 39 As he had in Italy, Monti proved to be less than a model prisoner. Shortly after beginning his sentence at Fort Leavenworth he went on a hunger strike and was put into solitary confinement. Monti’s sentence was later extended as punishment for breaking into the prison kitchen and stealing food. He also lodged two appeals of his sentence in 1951 and 1958. During the former he at- tempted to withdraw his guilty confession, claiming that his statement at his 1949 trial was not a confession of guilt, instead that the guilty plea was based on his mis- apprehension of its meaning and that he was coerced to plead guilty. Monti stated that his lawyers had failed to make clear that his actions were directed against the Communists, not against the U.S., and that he feared his choices were freedom or death. “I thought I was making a plea of technical guilt,” he told the court, “but denying any treasonable motive.”50 Further he asserted that the indictment was double jeopardy. At the treason trial Monti’s lawyers had presented him with three options: go to trial and risk the death sentence; plead insanity; or plead guilty and throw himself on the mercy of the court. They strongly recommended the third choice as they be- lieved if the case went to trial only a miracle could pro- duce a not-guilty verdict. Monti asserted he was put under “moral coercion,” a claim confirmed by a chaplain who testified that Monti’s parents and the lawyer put con- siderable pressure on the defendant to sign a confession, which the chaplain described as “moral coercion.”51 It also emerged that Monti made ten recordings in an effort to get to Berlin to see Hitler to advise him on how to stop the Allied bombing of German cities. Monti later claimed his motivation was to warn the U.S. of the threat of Communism and to fight against it. He also claimed he Father Charles Coughlin, Depression-era radio personality, and an anti- Semite who espoused fascist policies.whose speeches may have help in- expected his lawyers to do more than just plead for mercy; fluence Monti’s beliefs. he expected them to explain his actions. The court ruled on August 1, that Monti’s application had no merit.52 Later in Monti to confess in open court. A newspaper account wrote the decade he appealed on a technical ground that he that “the tall, handsome figure strode to the stand and ad- should have been arrested and tried in Florida, not New mitted calmly that he had turned traitor.” The newspaper York. That motion was also denied.53 went on to note that while Monti at times “wore an arro- Whatever happened to Martin J. Monti? On July 1, gant grin,” at other times he was somber, but throughout 1960, Monti completed the confinement portion of his sen- he spoke in an almost inaudible voice. The prosecutor made tence and was released from the U. S. Penitentiary at allusions to the Cold War, not mentioning that Monti had Lewisburg, Pennsylvania on parole. He remained on parole offered his services to fight America’s present enemy, the until January 1974.54 Nothing more appears in the official Communists. Instead, he stated that “We are now engaged records available or in the newspapers concerning this case in a ‘cold war.’ We hear of others who have held or may now and this individual. hold positions of high trust that they used to aid and com- fort, say, a potential enemy. Those so inclined will closely Conclusion regard what Your Honor does here today.” He concluded by reminding the Judge that treason was the most serious Was Martin Monti a traitor? Technically yes, but more crime that could be committed against the U.S.47 likely a confused individual who had mental problems. Monti’s lawyer pleaded for mercy, stating that, al- Monti was an impulsive man who did not necessarily plan though Monti was legally sane, that he was “mentally af- to defect, but probably did so when the opportunity pre- fected.” He made this appeal for his client not because he sented itself. His movements in Italy prior to stealing the applauded what he had done, but because “in a legal sense, P–38 and the absence of efforts to hide his identity argue he did not know what he was doing, no matter what the against the conclusion that Monti had any drawn-out plan psychiatrists said.”48 Monti’s parents and two of his four to defect.55 He did not plan to betray his country, but was brothers were present when he was sentenced to twenty- convinced that Russia, not Germany was America’s enemy. five years’ imprisonment.49 Certainly some of his actions and some of his words at the

40 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 time of the incident and at his trial indicate that he did not individuals had been convicted.56 Yet Monti, who wanted have a firm grip on reality. to fight the Soviets and saw the Germans as allies, was just One other speculation is perhaps in order. Would the a few years too early. The bottom line may be that no mat- results have been different if the times were different? ter how popular a war is, there will always be some indi- During the period Monti was tried for treason there were viduals who will buck the tide and see another side, or are two dozen other Americans indicted for treason, half for drawn into the other side. The lasting question may be, making broadcasts for the enemy. In January 1949, at the how does a democratic society treat these individuals? And very time he was facing the federal court, fourteen of these finally, how does history treat such cases? I

NOTES

1. An excellent source is Wikipedia, “Saint Patrick’s Battalion.” ing coup), to a duel. Averhart, Story of David Fagan. en.wikipedia.org/wik/Saint_Patrick%27s_Battalion. One second- 8. San Juan, “An African-American Soldier.” ary source notes the following desertion rates: the Mexican War 9. San Juan, “An African-American Soldier”; Timothy Russell, 8.3 percent, World War I 1.3 percent, World War II 5.3 percent, “’I Feel Sorry for these People’: African-American Soldiers in the and Vietnam 4.1 percent. Desertion in the Civil War was high on Philippine War,” Journal of African-American History (Summer both sides. R. A. Burchell book review of Roger Miller, Shamrock 2014), p. 209. and Sword, California History (Fall, 1991), p. 315. 10. Two sources were primarily used for the Provoo account: 2. One source writes that 39 percent were from Ireland and 13 Barak Kushner, “Treacherous Allies: The Cold War in East Asia percent from Germany, another that the unit included some run- and American Postwar Anxiety,” Journal of Contemporary History away slaves. Wikipedia, “Saint Patrick’s Battalion”; John Mahon, (Oct 2020); Wikipedia, “John David Provoo” en.wikipedia.org/ book review of Shamrock and Sword, The Journal of American wiki/John_David_Provoo. History (Sep 1990), p. 673. The causes for the desertions varied, 11. Kushner begins his article writing that Provoo initially met but included the harsh treatment and the anti-Catholic atmos- the Japanese attired in a kimono, with a deep bow, and welcoming phere in the American army, Mexican inducements (land and the Japanese officers in their language. I have found no confirma- bounties), along with conduct issues. Fairfax Downey, “Tragic tion of this incident, which if true, is so unusual as to be unforget- Story of the San Patricio Battalion,” American Heritage (Jun table to all in attendance. Kushner, “Treacherous Allies,” p. 813. 1955), p. 21. 12. Kushner, “Treacherous Allies,” p. 829. 3. In one of history’s twists of fate, the leader of the unit, John 13. However he was seen as being legally sane. Of this group of Riley was not hung as he had deserted before the declaration of eight, one was sentenced to death, three to life, with remaining war. Downey, “Tragic Story,” 21,23; Turtle Bunbury, “The San four to prison terms of six to thirty years. Kenneth Campbell, “A Patricios and the Mexican War of 1847” newstalk.com/newstalk- Stunned Provoo Gets Life Term: ‘Instability’ Averts Traitor breakfast/the-san-patricios-and-the-mexican-war-of-1847- Death,” New York Times (Feb 18, 1953), pp. 1, 14. 718572; Amy Greenberg, A Wicked War (NY: Knopf, 2012), p. 209; 14. Kushner, “Treacherous Allies,” 834-841; “Treason Conviction Texas State Historical Association, Pam Nordstrom, “San Patricio of Provoo is Upset,” New York Times (Aug 28, 1954), pp. 1, 6. Battalion.” tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/q1301. 15. Fred Borch, “Legal Lore: Tried for Treason: The Amazing 4. There were also Federal prisoners who switched sides, and Case of Private Dale Maple,” American Bar Association (Spring according to one source were also confusingly called “galvanized 2012); Emily Breslow, “Harvard to Treason,” The Harvard Crim- Yankees.” Mark Boatner, The Civil War Dictionary (NY: McKay, son (Mar 3, 2011); “Dale H. Maple,” Colorado Encyclopedia. 1959), p. 322; William Unrau, “Justice at Fort Laramie: The Trial 16. In World War II the American death rate in Japanese camps and Tribulations of a Galvanized Yankee,” Arizona and the West was about 50 percent, while in German camps less than 1 per- (Summer 1973), p. 108; R. K. Evans, “Extract from Paper on “Na- cent. For Russians in German camps and Germans in Russian tional Enlistment’” Infantry Journal (Jul-Aug 1911), p. 10; Elden camps the mortality rate was about 50 percent. Billings, book review of D. Alexander, The Galvanized Yankees, 17. There were no USAF or Marine Corps court-martials. Five Military Affairs (spg 1964), p. 37. The most famous of the Civil officers were tried for misconduct. Deane Denfeld, “Otho Bell of War deserters was an Englishman, Henry Stanley, who deserted Olympia and 20 Other U.S. Soldiers from the Korean War Defect from the Confederate army, Union army, and the Union navy. to China on February 24, 1954.” History Link essay 11263. histo- Later as a newsman he achieved international fame by “finding” rylink.org.11263; Max Hastings, The Korean War (Simon and doctor Livingston in Africa. Billings, book review. Schuster, 1987), 287,293,302,304. Another source writes that of 5. The U. S. Army was officially desegregated in the late 1950s, 1,600 prisoners, over 200 merited further investigation. “Miscon- nevertheless entered the Korea War with segregated units and duct in the Prison Camp,” Columbia Law Review (May 1956), pp. desegregated during that conflict. 737n198, 760, 781n546. 6. E. San Juan, “An African American Soldier in the Philippine 18. Brendan McNally, “The Korean War Prisoner Who Never Revolution: An Homage to David Fagan.” academia.edu/ Came Home,” The New Yorker (Dec 9, 2013). 242727/a_homage_to_david_fagan_african_american_soldier_in_ 19. “Misconduct in the Prison Camp,” p. 735; Wikipedia, “List of the_philippine_revolution; Sandra Averhart, “The Story of David American British Defectors in the Korean War.” Fagan Turncoat Hero for Black History Month.” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_and_British_defectors_i wuwf.org/post/story-david-fagan-turncoat-hero-featured-black- n_the_Korean_War. history#stream/0; Gill Boehringer, “Buffalo Soldiers in the Philip- 20. Wendell Rawls, “A Marine Court Finds Garwood Helped Foe pines.” blackagendareport.com/content/black-american-anti- as a Vietnam P. O. W.,” New York Times (Feb 6, 1981), p. A1; impe rialist-fighters-philippine-american-war. “Robert R. Garwood.” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_R._ Garwood. 7. He taunted the Americans, specifically the commander of his 21. Richard Linnett, “A U.S. Traitor’s Odd Twist of Fate,” History old unit, 24th Infantry regiment, and even challenged the most Net. historynet.com/u-s-traitors-odd-twist-fate.htm.; Gregg Jones, celebrated U. S. commander in the war, Frederick Funston, (who “Missing Soldier’s Family Finds Clues to His Fate in Cambodia,” had captured the insurrection’s leader Amilio Aguinindo in a dar- Seattle Times (Mar 27, 2009). Some go as far as to see Nolan, not

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 41 as a traitor, but an unsung hero. Nicholas Proffitt, “Friendly Fire,” 43. Two secondary sources assert that the claim of American de- book review of Monica Jensen-Stevenson, Spite House, New York fectors organized into a fighting unit (the George Washington Times (Mar 30, 1997), BRR. Brigade) was strictly fiction created by the Germans. Rod Soodal- 22. Charlie Savage, “Bergdahl, Branded a ‘Traitor’ by Trump, ter, “A Yank in the SS.” historynet.com/a-yank-in-the-ss.htm; “US Seeks a Pardon from Obama,” New York Times (Dec 3, 2016), A18. Volunteers in the Waffen-SS,” Jan 26, 2012. axishistory.com/ 23. Wikipedia, “Bowe Bergdahl.” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowe_ books/137-germany-military-other/foreign-volunteers/2119-us- Bergdahl. volunteers-in-the-waffen-ss. 24. CNN, “Bowe Bergdahl Fast Facts” (Mar 22, 2020). 44. Nathanial Weyl, Treason (Washington, DC: Public Affairs, 25. Wikipedia, “Bowe Bergdahl.” 1950), pp. 393-94; “Ex-Flier Confesses 21 Acts of Treason,” New 26. Savage, “Bergdahl,” A18; CNN, “Bowe Bergdahl Fast Facts”; York Times (Jan 18, 1949); “Treason Suspect Seeks His Release,” “The Soldier Trump Called a Traitor,” New York Times (Nov 27, St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Sep 22, 1948); “Florissant War Pilot In- 2020), SR10. Prior to his army service, Bergdahl had been in the dicted for Treason,” St. Louis Globe-Democrat (Oct 15, 1948). Coast Guard for twenty-six days before his discharge for psycho- 45. “St. Louisian Tells of Joining Nazi S.S. Troops After Being logical reasons with a “uncharacterized discharge.” Wikipedia, Captured: Conduct Under Inquiry by U. S.,” St. Louis Globe-Dis- “Bowe Bergdahl.” patch (Oct 15, 1948). 27. CNN, “Bowe Bergdahl Fast Facts”; Wikipedia, “Bowe 46. Toliver, The Interrogator, pp. 247-52; “Treason Charged,” New Bergdahl.” The most recent case of this kind of misbehavior in- York Times (Jan 27, 1948), p. 15; “Ex-Army Officer Held for Trea- volved John Walker Lindh in Afghanistan. However, as Lindh was son,” New York Times (Oct 15, 1948), p. 6; “Ex-Flier Confesses,” not in the U. S. military, his story is outside the range of our dis- New York Times (Jan 18, 1949), p. 2; “Attorneys Clash at Monti cussion. Hearing,” New York Times (Jul 27, 1951), p. 5; Msg 31450, Sulton 28. Another AAF officer was considered for court-martial for to AFHQ for Eaker, Nov 24, 1944; Report of Physical Examina- having worked with the Germans, but apparently due to the tion, Monti, Martin [Sep 29, 1945]; United States v. 2d Lt Martin statute of limitations was not tried. Some may claim he was J. Monti, Aug 29, 1945, pp. 24, 46. [all 3 in cm]; Alvin Goldstein, treated differently than Monti as he was of higher rank, a fighter “Testifies Monti Said U. S. was on Wrong Side in War,” St. Louis group commander, and a West Point graduate. This officer’s trans- Post-Dispatch (Jul 27, 1951). gressions were different than Monti’s; he was alleged to have 47. Drew Pearson, “High Army Officials Study Treason Charge,” given classified information to the Germans and to have ordered Washington Post (Nov 1, 1947), p. 12; “The Curious Case of Martin captured airmen to do the same. This is based strictly on one brief James Monti,” Short Rounds, strategypage.com/cic/docs/ newspaper account. Robert Allen, “Said to Have Given Nazis cic304b.asp. Plane Secrets,” Globe Democrat (Jan 5, 1949). 48. Alvin Goldstein, “Martin Monti of St. Louis Pleads Guilty in 29. Headquarters Fifteenth Air Force, Escape Statement, Monti, Treason Case and Gets 25 Years,” St. Louis Dispatch (Jan 17, Martin J., May 13, 1945. [2LT Martin J. Monti court-martial 1949). records, US Army Judiciary. Hereafter cited as cm.] 49. Ibid. 30. Review of the Staff Judge Advocate General, Martin J. Monti, 50. “Ex-Army Officer Held,” New York Times (Oct 15, 1948), p. 6; Aug 23, 1945, pp. 1, 21; Telephone conversation with PFC William “Monti Goes Back to Jail,” New York Times (Dec 25, 1948), p. 20; H. Soloman, Jul 31, 1945. [both cm] “Ex-Flier Confesses,” New York Times (Jan 18, 1948), p. 7; “Ex- 31. The aircraft in question was an unarmed photo reconnais- Flier Denies Guilt as Traitor,” New York Times (Jun 6, 1951), p. sance version of the P–38, an F–5E. 10; Headquarters European Command, SUB: Orders, Aug 25, 32. Louis S. Wilkerson, SUB: Monti, Martin J. Case No. 4322-G, 1948. [cm]; Weyl, Treason, pp. 395-96; Alvin Goldstein, “Monti Tes- May 14, 1945. [cm] He filed a flight plan for the P–38 flight using tifies He was Misled into Guilty Plea at Treason Trial,” St. Louis his true name. Post-Dispatch (Jul 19, 1951); “Monti Gets 25 Years, $10,000 Fine 33. J. D. Kincaid, SUB. Monti, Martin J. Case No. 3043-F, 3816- for Treason,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Jan 18, 1949). H, 4322-C, May 24, 1945. [cm] 51. “Court in Effect Says Monti Must Serve Out Term,” St. Louis 34. Myron G. Hoffman, SUB: Monti, Martin J. Case No. 3816-H, Post-Dispatch, (Aug 2, 1951); “Monti Gets 25 Years, $10,000 Fine Nov 30, 1944. [cm] for Treason,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Jan 18, 1949); Pipes, De- 35. AGWAR from TAG to AFHQ, MSG W87096, May 24, 1945. tailed Post. [cm] 52. “Ex-Counsel denies Coercion of Monti,” New York Times (Jul 36. Statement of 2d Lt Samuel P. Rugh to Special Agent Proctor 28, 1951), p. 5. H. Page, Oct 8, 1945 with extract from Martin J. Monti letter of 53. “Ex-Flier Denies,” New York Times (Jun 6, 1951), p. 10; Sep 15, 1945. [cm] “Monti to Appeal Treason Ruling,” New York Times (Aug 16, 37. Capt Henry H. W. Miles to Capt L.S. Wilkerson, SUB: Exam- 1951), p. 10; “Judge Rebukes Mrs. Monti for Signals to Son on An- ination of Officer, Jul 14, 1945; Martin Monti, Jr. to Mr. Ploeser, swers in Treason Trial,” New York Times (Jul 25, 1951), p. 12; “At- Oct 12, 1945 with extract from Martin J. Monti letter of Sep 15, torneys Clash,” New York Times (Jul 27, 1951), p. 4; “Ex-Counsel 1945. [both cm] Denies Coercion of Monti,” New York Times (Jul 28, 1951), p. 5; 38. Jason Pipes, Detailed Post. forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. Martin J. Monti, Jr. to the President, Nov 8, 1949. [470 M. Harry php?t=52047. S. Truman Library]; “Monti Loses Fight to Change His Guilty 39. Headquarters of Mediterranean Theater of Operations, Of- Plea,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Aug 2, 1951); “Testifies Monti Said fice of the Theater Judge Advocate, United States v. 2d Lt Martin U.S. Was on Wrong Side in War,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch (July 27, J. Monti, Review of Theater Judge Advocate, on Record of Trial 1951); Alvin Goldstein, “His Confession of Treason True, Monti by General Court-Martial, Aug 29, 1945. [cm]. Testifies,” St. Louis-Post Dispatch (Jul 20, 1951). 40. Maj Charles G. Heitzeberg, Memorandum for General 54. United States v. Monti, 168 F. Supp. 671. Vaughan, Sep 1, 1945; Representative Walter C. Ploeser to Tru- 55. J. Michael Quinlan, Director Federal Bureau of Prisons to man, Jan 25, 1946. [both 303-M, Harry S. Truman Library]; “15- Congressman Rick Boucher, Oct 8, 1992. Year Sentence for Pilot A.W.O.L. to Seek Action,” St. Louis Post 56. He filed a flight plan using his true name. The only alias he Dispatch (Jan 25, 1946); Adjutant General AGKC-M 201 Monti, used were on the propaganda broadcasts. Louis Wilkerson, Dis- Martin J., Feb 4, 1946. [cm] cussion and Summary of Evidence; Counter Intelligence Corps, 41. “Treason Charged to Ex-Air Officer,” New York Times (Jan Memorandum to the Officer in Charge, SUB: Monti, Martin J., 27, 1948), p. 15; 168 Federal Supplement 671,672-73. Case number 4322-G. [both cm] 42. Raymond F. Toliver, The Interrogator (Fallbrook, CA: Aero, 57. Lewis Wood, “Ex-Clerk in U.S. Embassy at Berlin is Held as 1978), pp. 247-52. Broadcaster for Nazis,” New York Times Jan 13, 1949, p. 11.

42 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 The Bomber on the Beach

Undated photo of a twin-engined British bomber, with German Luftwaffe non-com standing before it, crashed on an uniden- tified European beach during World War II. This photo was Brian Dervin Dillon liberated by Private Richard H. Dillon in Germany in 1945 and sent home to his mother in California shortly afterwards. (All photos courtesy of the author’s Dillon collection.)

y father, Richard H. Dillon (1924-2016) was a World War II combat soldier who “liberated” German guns, medals, photographs and documents, sending them home through the G.I. mail as he fought his way across France, Bel- gium, Holland, Germany and Czechoslovakia in 1944-45. One of the most intriguing photographs I found in my father’sM World War II collection after his death was of a British twin-engined bomber, crash-landed, wheels-up on a Euro- pean beach, with a German Luftwaffe non-com standing in front of it (above). The nose of the plane, which might have made identification easy, was cut off in this photograph. Similarly, the angle of the wing obscured the fuselage top where, had a rotating gun turret been visible, identification would also have been fairly simple. Most frustrating, however, was the position of the German in front of the airplane: blocking the usual location where identification numbers were stenciled. Hoping to find more information, I circulated copies of this photo amongst aviation-savvy friends of mine, and also sent it to the official Royal Air Force Museum in London. The conclusion offered by those more familiar with WWII British twin-engined bombers than I was that the photo was probably that of a Bristol Blenheim Mk. IV, but since the aircraft I.D. was unknown, no additional information could be elicited. So back I went to the ongoing examination of my late fa- ther’s World War II photographic collection, then in its third consecutive year. My Dad was a mortarman in the Weapons Platoon of Love Company, 315th Infantry Regiment, of the famous “Cross of Lorraine” 79th Infantry Division. A combat casualty replacement, he landed in Normandy three months after D-Day to join his division in the bloody fighting in Lorraine in September, 1944. He was nick-named “the Perfesser” by his “semi- literate, hillbilly buddies” because of his two years of college at U.C. Berkeley before he was drafted just after his 19th birthday. After only a month in combat my father was badly wounded by a German “daisy-cutter” mortar round. Following three months in Army hospitals, his wounds and broken bones still not completely healed, “Perfesser” Dillon was sent back into the line, for his second episode of combat in eastern France. In February, 1945, the battered 79th Division was pulled out of Lorraine, and sent north to rest, refit, and retrain, in anticipation of the Rhine crossing. Soon it would spear- head the American assault into the heart of Germany’s industrial region, the Ruhr. Private Dillon now moved from France to Belgium, and then to the southernmost tip of Holland. Still limping, he invaded Germany, and fought through the Ruhr until VE Day. Afterwards, his unit kept pushing east, until it occupied westernmost Czechoslovakia, confronting the Russian armies moving west (next page). The old World War II joke was that the Germans fought for der Vaterland, the British for King and Country, the French for La Belle France, but the Americans fought for Souvenirs. This was true for “Perfesser” Dillon and also, perhaps,

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 43 Twenty-one-year-old “Perfesser” Dillon near Pilsen, Czechoslovakia, after The two decorations that meant the most to any foot soldier in the ETO of VE Day, 1945. A combat soldier in the Weapons Platoon of Love Company, World War II: my father’s combat infantryman’s badge, and his purple 315th Infantry Regiment, 79th Infantry Division, he fought and served in heart. France, Belgium, Holland, Germany, and Czechoslovakia. to an even greater extent for his older brother John A. trouble caused by Teutonic bellicosity to two generations of (Jack) Dillon (1915-2001). Captain Jack Dillon was in com- the Dillon family during two World Wars. My father sent bat as the lead scout ahead of an American armored divi- back captured pistols, rifles, swords, bayonets, knives, hel- sion also fighting in 1944-45. Both Dillon brothers ended mets, uniform elements, medals, Nazi party pins, SS death’s up WIA at the same time, but in different Army hospitals, head insignia, hundreds of German postcards, and thou- not too far from where their father (and my grandfather) sands of captured German photos, all courtesy of the free U.S. Army Artillery officer William T. Dillon (1869-1938) G.I. mail. Older brother Jack Dillon even outdid his younger had also fought and been WIA 27 years earlier, in 1918: brother Dick in an experiment to see just how “honest” the same enemy, same battlefield, different war. G.I. mail really was. Armor Captain Jack, in 1945, mailed So looting and pillaging through Germany in 1945 home to Sausalito, California, a confiscated, beautifully en- seemed only the most minimal kind of payback for all of the graved, very expensive, Krupp double-barreled shotgun in its original hard leather case. He simply scrawled his ad- dress on that case in grease pencil, without any attempt to Brian Dervin Dillon is both the son and the father of his- wrap up his prize, nor camouflage it in any way. The shot- torians, and was the youngest (aged 25) archaeologist to gun, of course, made it home intact. My Uncle Jack gave it earn a Ph.D. at the University of California, Berkeley. A to me many years later, and I still have it. Phi Beta Kappa, former Fulbright Fellow, and the recip- Younger brother and budding historian Dick Dillon ient of more than two dozen fellowships, grants, and re- thought that the documentary and photographic evidence search awards, Dr. Dillon has done fieldwork in for the triumph of American arms was just as important California, Guatemala and three other Central Ameri- as the captured pistols and rifles he mailed back to Cali- can countries since 1972. He has published more than fornia. The “liberated” photographs he sent home included 200 books, monographs, and articles on archaeology and those of Wehrmacht soldiers in German-occupied coun- history, including American military history. tries, from North Africa to Russia, of Luftwaffe flyers in

44 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 The second photograph of the bomber on the beach discovered shortly after the first. Now identifiable as a Blenheim Mk. IV, its identification number (T1945) is also clearly revealed. From this photo the pilot’s name and the location and date of the crash were quickly determined through the courtesy of the Royal Air Force Museum, London. And then the pilot’s descendants were traced to British Columbia, Canada. their cockpits, and of SS men and Nazi bigwigs, including tification number (T1945) all clearly visible. With this final, Hitler and Goering. All were candid photographs ripped all-important, bit of information in hand, my second Inter- out of photo albums found in the smoking ruins of one Ger- net query sent to the London Royal Air Force Museum man town after another as the 79th Division advanced. My quickly bore fruit. Dad sent these photos home to California six, eight, or ten Mr. Andrew Renwick, Curator of Photographs, was at a time, in addition to 359 separate postcards and dozens able to tell me that the plane in my father’s two captured of multi-page letters. “Perfesser” Dillon’s widowed mother, photographs was indeed a Blenheim IV, of the No. 2 my own grandmother, pasted his “liberated” German pho- (Coastal) Training Unit, Catfoss airfield, just inland from tos into one photo album after another in anticipation of Hornsea on the Yorkshire coast. Renwick’s skillful search his return. of RAF records revealed that the bomber crashed at 5:40 And return he did, after three years with his Uncle A.M. on the morning of August 28, 1941. The beach was on Samuel, in early 1946. But my father was so sick of war, the west coast of Texel Island, Holland, about a hundred and so eager to re-enter civilian life, that most of his cap- miles north of Amsterdam, and about 185 air miles due tured German loot, including his thousands of photo- east of the English coastline. Better yet, Renwick was able graphs, was simply put away in his army footlocker. My to identify the unfortunate pilot of T1945 as Flight Lieu- WIA father had survived the war, but, unfortunately, all of tenant Melville Harrison Gifford (1912-1961), serial No. his best childhood friends had been KIA. Consequently, J/5141, Royal Canadian Air Force. Richard H. Dillon’s WWII photo collection, and the painful Gifford was on a night training flight, and through ei- memories it represented, remained all-but-forgotten for 70 ther compass or navigation error ended up out of fuel near years, until I found it after his death in 2016. the Dutch coast, and had to make an emergency, wheels- Some of my father’s captured photographs were of the up, landing on Texel beach. Flying Officer Gifford fortu- Allies in defeat early in the war: French soldiers surren- nately survived the crash, but was made a prisoner of war. dering in 1940, or Germans rounding up Greek civilians in He was sent to the Luftwaffe’s infamous Stalag Luft III, 1941. But the most unique photo of all that I discovered in near Zagan, Poland, immortalized by the 1963 hit movie 2019 was of the Bomber on the Beach. Almost miracu- The Great Escape. He is also mentioned in the 1985 book lously, a couple of weeks later while still plowing through Fragments of War by Joyce Hibbert. Gifford returned to my father’s WWII photo collection, I discovered a second, Canada after the liberation of Europe, and married Brenda companion, photograph of the same crashed bomber Emily Walley (1923-1980) in Sherbrooke, Quebec, in 1948. (above). This exposure had its nose, fuselage top, and iden- Lieutenant Gifford died in 1961, and was buried in the

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 45 It could have been my Dad on that Dutch beach...Nineteen-year-old Richard H. Dillon proudly stands in front of his 65hp Taylorcraft “grasshopper” on the day he soloed, Texas, 1943. He could fly, but he couldn’t navigate, so after flunking out of the U.S. Army Air Force, off to the infantry he went.

Champ d’Honneur Military Cemetery in Quebec City, descendants. They live a short distance from my cousin’s Canada. Melville and Brenda Gifford had two sons: two of wife’s relatives. Her own father was a very proud Royal their grandchildren live in British Columbia. Canadian Air Force Pilot and British Columbia aviation Two remarkable, serendipitous, coincidences attach history author. Flying Officer Gifford’s daughter-in-law and themselves to this unique story of the two photographs of grandchildren had no idea that his near-death experience the Bomber on the Beach which have just come to light in 1941 had been photographically commemorated. So, sev- after 79 years in the shadows. The first is that, although enty-nine years after the event, I was honored to share my my father died before my own recent research revealed the father’s captured photos with them. time, place, and cause (navigation error) of the 1941 crash depicted in his two captured photographs, he himself could Acknowledgements: Many thanks to my friend and pilot very easily have been the pilot slamming an out-of-gas Ken Pauley for early suggestions putting me on the proper twin-engined bomber onto a German-held beach. A year research track. Thanks also to proofreader extraordinaire before “Perfesser” Dillon entered combat as an infantry- Ed Riegler for helping convert Dillonese into English. I am man, he had been trained as an American Army Air Force also most grateful to London RAF Museum photographic pilot, and, in fact, soloed at age 19 (above). Sent on to nav- curator Andy Renwick for positive identification of the igation school, and to twin-engined light bombers not too plane and its pilot. Many thanks to Paula Simpson, my different from Flight Lieutenant Gifford’s Blenheim, my cousin Doug Soderland’s wife, and the daughter of an his- father could fly but he couldn’t do the math necessary for torically savvy Royal Canadian Air Force pilot herself, for navigation. His final test was a long-distance, twin-engined tracking down Flying Officer Gifford’s descendants in Que- bomber flight from his home airfield in central Texas up to bec and in British Columbia. And finally, thanks to my late Springfield, Illinois, and then back again, “boxing the com- Father, without whose compulsive collecting habit in 1944- pass” through successive course changes. Unfortunately, in 45 as he fought his way across the ETO, the two unique a classic error, he flew instead to Springfield, Missouri. So Bomber on the Beach photographs would doubtless have after turning in his wings, off to the infantry he went. Clos- been lost to history. And thanks again, Dad, for not throw- ing the “small world, isn’t it?” circle, I traced and made con- ing away your WWII photograph collection, even though tact with some of Flying Officer Melville Harrison Gifford’s for 70 years you could not bring yourself to look at it. I

46 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 THE FINAL FLIGHT OF B–17G 43-38856M

Don Madar/Jeff Antol B–17G L 43-38856M in mid-flight. The author’s uncle was a passenger on the aircraft’s last flight.

he tragic events of April 23, 1945, will forever live on in our family and as part of the history of one of the most notorious bomb groups of World War II, the 381st. The crash of the B–17G Flying Fortress with serial number L 43-38856M was one of drama, personal tragedy and is recorded as the worst aviation crash in the history of the Isle of Man, an island between England and Ireland in the Irish Sea. TOur uncle, Andrew Piter, Jr., would lose his life that day on the mountain of North Barrule after two years of hard work in maintenance serving in the 381st as part of the 1775th Ordinance and Maintenance Group. Andy was drafted into the Army Air Force in the summer of 1942 and left his home in the small town of Banning, Fayette County, Pennsylvania. He was the only son of Andrej and Dorothy Piter (married in Connellsville in June of 1915) and was one of six children (all born in Star Junction), our grandmothers, Ann Piter Odelli and Dorothy Piter Antol being among his 5 sisters. His other sisters were, Mary Piter Risner, Ruth Piter Pavlus and Mildred Piter Crilley – all of who would move to live in the Cleveland, Ohio area. Our commemorating group was made up of seven of Andy’s nieces and nephews – offspring of his sisters. He did his basic training at Ft. F. E. Warren in Cheyenne, Wyoming, and then returned home for the last time in April, 1943. Andy graduated from Ordinance School in Pomona, California, and then joined the 381st in February, 1943 in Pueblo, Colorado, where the entire Group prepared for deployment to Ridgewell, England. The 8th Air Force would be key in liberating Western Eu- rope in World War II. Andy and the Group arrived at Andrew Piter and his parents, Andrej and Dorothy Piter and sisters Ann Ridgewell in June, 1943 and he would serve his country Piter Odelli, Dorothy Piter Antol, Mary Piter Risner, Ruth Piter Pavlus and there up until the fateful day of his death in April, 1945. Mildred Piter Crilley. (All photos courtesy of the author.)

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 47 The tail wreckage of B-17G, 43-38856

The energy in the air at Ridgewell in April, 1945 was becoming a bit more relaxed. On Monday , April 23, 1945, no operations over Germany were planned for the group. Excitement was felt around the station, and a flight was organized by Colonel Hall to take a group of servicemen, primarily men who had serviced the airbase throughout the nearly two years at Ridgewell. This se- lect group would travel from Ridgewell to Belfast, Ire- land, where they would spend some time resting and relaxing as a thanks for their effort and hard work at the base. The B–17G 43-38856 M was flown by Captain Charles E. Ackerman, a veteran combat officer with over Andy Piter, on left, working on the famous B–17, “Stage Door Canteen.” 455 hours experience on B–17’s. He had completed a first tour of twenty-five combat missions and had only two more missions left to complete his second tour. Cap- The B–17G, 43-38856, that was delivered to the tain Ackerman was a very experienced pilot, even at USAAF on September, 30, 1944, flew from Lincoln, Ne- twenty-two years of age. The aircraft was to be co-piloted braska in the fall of 1944 and would arrive at Ridgewell by Flight Officer Edwin A. Hutcheson. Edwin was in October of that year. Upon its arrival, it was assigned twenty years old and had sixty-one hours experience on to the Eighth Air Force, 381st Heavy Bombardment the B–17G. In addition, there were twenty-nine other Group, 534 Squadron, based at Army Air Force Station men, which included Andy, that would take off from 167, Ridgewell, Essex. The station was then under the Ridgewell that spring morning. command of Colonel Conway S. Hall. There the plane At 9:04 AM, the aircraft lifted off from Ridgewell. would receive its Triangle “L” for Ridgewell and its radio Captain Ackerman positioned the aircraft heading north call letter “M”.

Donald J. Madar is a retired chemical engineer with a passion for history. He is particularly interested in family history and the stories behind the history. His studies unearthed a connection between his paternal grandfather and the first Czechoslovak Legion in Rus- sia during World War I. He also discovered the story of his maternal grandfather's brother who played for the Pittsburgh Steelers after World War II, where he was a B–24 tail gunner. He also wrote a book about his great-uncle, his maternal grandmother's only brother, who was a member of the 381st Bomb Group. So this story of Andrew Piter is a continuation of his interest. Jeff Antol, who assisted with this article is a The rugged hillside where 43-38856 craashed. cousin of the author.

48 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 The bodies of the victims, gathered for repatriation. The original burial site, in England, of Andrew Piter, Jr. by northwest, for what he thought should be a routine was that Andy’s body was easily recognizable. flight. His estimated time of arrival at Nutt’s Corner, Colonel Hall was advised by senior RAF officers, Belfast, Ireland, was approximately 11:00 AM. At 10:15 that he would have to proceed through diplomatic chan- AM the aircraft was approaching the north east coast of nels with the Manxian Government before being allowed the Isle of Man. to take the bodies of his men back to Ridgewell. He was “Harold Ennett was working that morning where he told this could take a couple of days. Going against diplo- was employed as a tractor driver. At 10:20 AM he noticed matic channels, Colonel Hall had the bodies loaded onto a four-engine aircraft flying in from the east coast. He his plane, ‘Little Rockette’ by RAF personnel on April estimated its height at no more than 500 ft. from his po- 24th! He really made a courageous call in getting the sition, and could clearly see a star on its wing as it men back to English soil. passed over. He stared at it in disbelief, as he realized it Andrew Piter, Jr. and the other thirty men who died was flying straight towards the mist-covered slopes of that day on North Barrule were buried on April 27, 1945, North Barrule. He lost sight of it after a few seconds and at Cambridge American Military Cemetery. It was the then heard a great explosion as the B–17G crashed into largest funeral ever seen there as seventeen truckloads the mountain, approximately 300 feet below safely clear- of men from Ridgewell attended. This truly was a ing the peak.” tragedy, with human interest, fifteen days before the end As RAF personnel arrived, the grim task of recover- of the war in Europe. Andrew’s body was returned to the ing the bodies began. The bodies were brought down on United States in the summer of 1948, and is laid to rest stretchers by the RAF and were then conveyed to An- next to his parents in Olive Branch Cemetery outside of dreas. It was there that the task of identification began. Smithton, Pennsylvania. The following day, Colonel Hall and Colonel George The site of the crash is now a peaceful hillside with Shackley, with a team of personnel including a dentist little left to tell of the events of seventy-five years ago. A and flight surgeon, helped in the identification procedure. memorial to the men who lost their lives that day was Hall and Shackley also went to the crash site to see what erected at the crash site in 1995. This was, and still is, could be learned of the cause of this accident. A personal the worst aircraft accident in the history of the Isle of account from one of the members of the recovery team Man, and a tragic one in American history. I

A memorial to the crash victims on the site. The final resting place for Andrew Piter, Jr.

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 49 Book Reviews

SAC Time: A Navigator in the Strategic Air Com- Valiant Boys. By Tony Blackman and Anthony Wright. mand. By Thomas E. Alexander. College Station: Texas London UK: Grub Street Publishing, 2019. Photographs. A&M University Press, 2020. Photographs. Pp. 102. $27.00. Illustrations. Maps. Drawings. Pp. 192. $22.95 paperback. ISBN: 978-162349843-6 ISBN: 978-191162124-9

This book is a transcription of an oral history provided Readers know what they are going to get when they by Alexander. As such, it is his recollection of events that pick up one of Tony Blackman’s “Boys” series: a brief back- occurred 50-60 years ago. It is important that a reader rec- ground of the particular aircraft, followed by a series of ognizes that he is seeing a story unfold thru a glass, darkly. first-person essays written by “boys” directly associated In addition, Alexander acknowledges that “there is a with the aircraft, and a closure containing ancillary infor- stream of alcohol that runs through these military memo- mation of interest to a reader who wants a bit more. The ries.” So, it is best if a reader adjusts his expectations of format is a bit formulaic but, sometimes, less is more. In what he hopes to gain from the book. the case of these books that cover two of the three aircraft Alexander began his military experience through the types of the RAF V-Force strategic platforms, the straight- Reserve Officer Training Corps. After commissioning, he forward approach works quite well. proceeded to basic navigator training and eventual assign- Although it was the first of the V-Force to become op- ment to a KC–97 air-refueling unit assigned to the newly erational, the Valiant is probably the least well known of created Strategic Air Command (SAC). Although a mem- the triumvirate. In many ways it was a transitional design ber of SAC for only a short time, Alexander’s strongest and that was rushed into service before it was ready and before most consistent memories are of the Commander-in-Chief the limitations of its design were completely understood. of SAC, General Curtis LeMay. LeMay served as the North The results were numerous accidents, a relatively short Star for Alexander’s early military career, and he holds the service life, and something of a black eye for the RAF. general in the highest esteem to this day. Blackman points out the retirement announcement was Alexander left the active duty Air Force but continued timed to coincide with the funeral of Sir Winston Churchill to fly as part of an Air National Guard tanker unit until to ensure it received as little attention as possible. None of his final separation from service in the late 1960s. He which diminished the bravery and creativity of the “boys” maintained an inactive reserve status for several years. who brought the aircraft into squadron service and devel- Alexander makes clear that, while he built a successful oped operational tactics and maintenance procedures on post-service career in the retail sector, his military service the fly. And many of the lessons learned on the Valiant and aviation experiences hold a special place in his heart. formed the foundation of the careers of the Victors and Vul- SAC Time is clearly a labor of love and—as is true of cans which followed. some love affairs—flaws are overlooked. While following a Blackman builds a compelling case for the Victor as general chronological organization, the chapters’ internal the most successful of the V-Force platforms. While always structure is haphazard and confusing. A chapter on celes- operating in the shadow of its more photogenic sibling, the tial navigation diverges into a description of aircrew sur- flexibility of the platform and its role as an air refueling vival training at Reno-Stead AFB. There are precious few tanker were critical to the RAF’s mission in the Falklands memories of the aircraft he flew on or of his fellow crew Campaign and the RAF contribution to Desert Storm. The members. Other than the folks he “partied” with, there was Victor’s role as an active combatant provides a wealth of no clear picture of the social side of the Air Force of that material for the book—so much material, that Blackman time. And there is very little information on Alexander as includes several chapters that were not included in the an aviator. He mentions that he served as an instructor but book on his website. The book is lavishly illustrated with makes no mention of his flying time or navigator rating. both color and black-and-white photography and numer- As a SAC navigator myself, I had hoped that this book ous illustrations. Chapters on the website offer detailed would connect me with the generation of aviators who technical information on navigation and weapons systems went before me. In that, I was disappointed. as well as examples of nose art and livery worn by the Vic- tor during Desert Storm. Gary Connor, docent, Smithsonian National Air and Space Both Valiant Boys and Victor Boys are quality products Museum’s Udvar Hazy Center and good value. The style and structure are formulaic, and the differing styles of the many contributors can be discon- NNNNNN certing. Seeing one contributor describe the RAF Quick Re- action Alert program as crewmen waiting to “Start World War III” seemed to indicate the author or editor didn’t un- Victor Boys. By Tony Blackman with Garry O’Keefe. Lon- derstand the concept of deterrence. Several contributors don UK: Grub Street Publishing, 2019. Photographs. Illus- rely heavily on jargon and slang, which places the non- trations. Maps. Drawings. Pp. 198. $22.95 paperback. British or non-Commonwealth reader at a distinct disad- ISBN: 978-101162125-6 and vantage. But these are minor criticisms. For readers

50 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 interested in these platforms and the V-Force overall, these new F–104 opportunity. German maintenance, GE military books are highly recommended. jet engines, and upgrades to Martin-Baker ejection seats added to the Widowmaker’s accident history. “Many prob- Gary Connor, docent, Smithsonian National Air and Space lems with the F–104 in the early days were mainly due to Museum’s Udvar Hazy Center the shallow learning curve that maintenance was on. They had to get used to a rather sophisticated technology and NNNNNN were not able to provide the pilots with the flight hours necessary to build efficiency.” The Indian AF (IAF) later Lockheed F–104 Starfighter: A History. By Martin W. named the plane the “Wicked One” due to its challenging Bowman. Barnsley UK: Pen & Sword Books, 2019. Photo- history. graphs. Tables. Index. Pp. 320. $39.95. ISBN: 978-1-47386- In 1978, three NF–104As were purposely built for the 3262 USAF Aerospace Research Pilots School at Edwards AFB. Each had an additional Rocketdyne liquid-fuel auxiliary Martin Bowman has written a really good book cover- rocket engine and hydrogen peroxide thrusters at the nose, ing the significant and exciting history of the F–104 tail, and wing tips to control attitude at high altitudes— Starfighter. The book has over 200 color photographs and like a spacecraft. These aircraft were designed to operate provides a detailed discussion of the type’s complex 20- above 100,000 feet to expose astronaut candidates to space- year-plus history. The F–104 is probably one of the most flight conditions. In 1963, Maj. Smitty Smith took his NF– iconic and “coolest looking” fighter aircraft ever designed. 104 to 118,600 feet, an unofficial world altitude record from It was first called “the missile with a man in it.” And pilots a ground takeoff. wore spurs for locking their legs into the ejection seats! Be- Bowman’s book is packed with F–104 history but sides all the facts, figures, and technical information, there needs a more comprehensive index to all this information. are also many firsthand stories and experiences from RAF, Despite this, the book is a great summary of the F–104 USAF, USN, USMC, Israeli, German, and other nations’ Starfighter, its aviation records, and pilot achievements. pilots. Some interesting facts Bowman brings out include: Paul D. Stone, Docent, NASM’s Udvar-Hazy Center The USAF had 296 F–104s. One of its original purposes was to replace the F–100 Super Sabre as an intercep- NNNNNN tor to incoming enemy formations. The Air Forces of fifteen nations flew the many models of Sighted Sub, Sank Same: The United States Navy’s the F–104; the German Luftwaffe had 916. Models Air Campaign against the U-Boat. By Alan C. Carey. were produced under contract to Lockheed in seven Havertown Penn.: Casemate, 2019. Maps. Tables. Photo- different countries. graphs. Notes. Appendices. Bibliography. Index. Pp. xx, Germany called the F–104 the “Widowmaker,” having lost 217. $34.95 ISBN: 978-1-61200-783-0 292 of them in accidents. In 1959 at Edwards AFB, the F–104 set a zoom altitude Having published more than ten books about World record of 103,389 ft. The F–104 routinely intercepted War II naval aviation, Carey is well qualified to discuss U-2s on training flights above 60,000 feet. America’s use of aircraft to counter the impact of the Ger- The Starfighter was used in many chase plane roles at Ed- man submarine effort to disrupt allied commercial sea traf- wards AFB for flight tests and X-15 test flights. fic in the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. As the In 1962, Capt Charles Tofferi became the USAF Top Gun title suggests, this work focuses almost entirely on the in his Starfighter by winning the World Wide Weapons Navy’s efforts. Mention of the U.S. Army Air Forces and Meet at Nellis AFB. Britain’s Coastal Command is generally limited to their in- Worldwide, 2577 F–104s were produced—1241 of them in volvement with the Navy in successfully sinking U-boats. Europe. The book’s ten chapters combine a chronological and Bowman’s introductory chapter gives a very good sum- topical approach. The first chapter examines the impact of mary of the history of Lockheed and the F–104. Tony U-boat operations from 1939 into 1941, prior to America’s LeVier, the famous Lockheed chief test pilot, made the first formal entry into the war. U-boat activity along the United flight in an F–104 prototype in 1954. Service deliveries States’ Atlantic coast prompted the Navy to organize the began in 1958. Unfortunately, by the time the F–104 had Eastern Sea Frontier to help protect commercial shipping. logged 100,000 flight hours in 1961, forty-nine out of 296 The second chapter details these operations from January Starfighters operated by the USAF had been lost with 1942 to July 1943. eighteen pilots killed—none of them in combat. This did Chapters 3 through 5 examine the Navy’s efforts in the not help the F–104’s future. Caribbean, South Atlantic, and particularly the Brazilian However, the growing Communist threat and Ger- coast through the summer of 1943. Operations out of As- many’s need to join with other nations opened up a whole cension Island from November 1943 through April 1944

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 51 comprise the sixth chapter followed by a chapter on activity submarine operations and bombing of industry and cities. in the Mediterranean from November 1942 to May 1944. He writes for a general audience stating in his forward that By the summer of 1943, the Navy’s commitment to bat- while there have been excellent technical studies on the tling the U-boats had expanded substantially, demanding subject, “its implementation and critical influence on the a significant reorganization—formation of Fleet Air Wing war’s outcome have been largely ignored by historians Seven. Its operations through the end of the war are dis- writing for a general readership. I hope this book will fill cussed in Chapter 8. that gap.” Chapters 9 and 10 review the role of hunter-killer Fine does an excellent job in discussing the develop- groups comprised of an escort aircraft carrier and several ment of radar in general and specifically microwave radar. destroyers or destroyer escorts or both from April 1943 He credits the well-known and not-so-well-known person- through August 1944. The final chapter summarizes the alities involved. The book puts the reader into the Euro- use of blimps deployed along America’s coastlines. pean and Atlantic war with a concise but adequate context. Relying on after-action reports, Carey has compiled a The book describes the use and value of radar, first as very detailed account of how the Navy utilized a wide va- the basis of an effective air defense system in the Battle of riety of aircraft to successfully accomplish its mission of Britain (he states that radar was the “deciding factor” in subduing the U-boat threat. The most interesting report that campaign—an arguable assertion). He then goes into concerns the capture of U-505. its effective use in the anti-submarine battle. It certainly Carey assembled an exceptional collection of represen- was a major factor contributing to the defeat of the sub- tative photographs, including twenty in color. One could marines along with ship building, long-range aircraft, di- argue that emphasizing the images over the narrative rection-finding gear, and broken codes, The German might have been a better approach. Most photos are pre- submariners lost the battle and suffered extraordinary sented in a relatively small format. Furthermore, like most losses; two thirds of their boats and 70% of their crews. The operational histories, this work becomes a bit tedious at German failure to starve out the British, knock Britain out times as Carey recounts one intercept after another. The by air, or to launch an invasion made German victory more emphasis is on what happened, making this volume quite difficult. It was, however, the invasion of Russia, and its valuable when it comes to tracing a specific action. This long, costly combat, that sealed the fate of Germany. To be might be of particular value to a family member interested sure, German inability to neutralize Britain was a major in learning more about granddad’s time in the Navy. factor in the outcome of the war. Other than relatively brief mention, little space is de- Radar was also important in the bombardment of Eu- voted to the technology battle—the impact of the Ultra rope. Among the problems Allied airmen faced were poor code-breaking intercepts, acoustic homing torpedoes, weather conditions over their bases, to and from their tar- highly sensitive airborne radar, depth-charge improve- gets, as well as over the targets. While the British devel- ments, and air-to-surface rockets. German countermea- oped new equipment and tactics and turned from visual sures are, for the most part, ignored. Alfred Price’s classic day bombing to night bombing early in the war, the Amer- Aviation Versus Submarines is recommended for those in- ican response to weather issues was slower. It was not until terested in the cat-and-mouse technical side. the fall of 1943 that they conducted their first non-visual Some patience is required in dealing with the numer- raid. Accuracy using radar techniques was poor. But the ous typos—far more than I have observed in other works Germans were forced to defend against these radar-guided over the past decade. Another annoyance was the decision attacks in the poor weather which imposed a high rate of to describe distances and heights of less than a mile in both operational losses. The bombing and the associated air-to- meters and yards or feet. Despite these, anyone with an in- air battle led to the defeat of the Luftwaffe and Allied con- terest in aircraft as a counter to the submarine should con- trol of the air for the 6 June invasion and the remainder of sider this work. the war. What makes this book different and better than aver- Steven D. Ellis, Lt Col, USAFR (Ret), docent, Museum of age is getting the air war down to the personal level. Fine Flight, Seattle does this by interspersing into the technical discussion the story of his uncle, a radar navigator who flew 28 of these NNNNNN missions. The result is a good overview of the development of this vital device and its employment down to human Blind Bombing: How Microwave Radar Brought the level. Allies to D-Day and Victory in World War II. By Nor- However, a few cautionary notes. Fine has produced a man Fine. Lincoln NE: Potomac Books, 2019. Photographs. book, as he intended, clearly for a popular audience. There Pp. 230. $29.95. ISBN: 978-16401220-8 are over 500 endnotes, mostly citations from published sec- ondary sources. But notably absent are such significant au- Fine’s book describes the World War II development of thors as Roger Freeman, Steve McFarland, Wesley microwave radar concentrating on those employed for anti- Newton, Richard Overy, Wesley Craven, and James Cate.

52 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 The only new material consists of interviews with his uncle duct a strategic campaign in the same unforgiving terms and a scientist involved in radar development. Further, he he used to describe that of Bomber Command, listing a does not discuss, or even mention, the use of radar in the steady stream of early missteps and miscues and of heavy bombing of Japan. The proportion of blind bombing there losses and failures of leadership. Garcia builds a strong was much greater than in the European campaign and in- case that Harris used these early problems in a failed at- cluded the use of not only the APQ-13 radar that Fine dis- tempt to justify absorbing the American bombers into RAF cusses in detail, but also the more sophisticated APQ-7. Bomber Command. Garcia does go to some pains to show Blind Bombing is an easy read strong on discussion of that the US emphasis on bombing specific targets vice the development of radar, adequate in treating operations, areas was uniquely American. And this more precise tactic good on crediting the various men involved in the story, was abandoned late in the war when bombardiers were re- and excellent with the personal touch of an operator in ac- moved from all aircraft except the lead ship in a formation; tion. As such, it provides an effective introduction to the the “toggliers” pickled their bombs when the lead bom- subject. bardier, using his Norden bombsight, dropped his weapons. Garcia also delves into the psychological cost paid by the Kenneth P. Werrell, Culpeper VA American B–17 and B–24 crews during the European air war. NNNNNN Garcia does miss a crucial point. He mentions the Eighth Air Force change in leadership that sent Eaker to Storm Over Europe: Allied Bombing Missions in The the Mediterranean Theater and installed Doolittle at the Second World War. By Juan Vazquez Garcia. Havertown helm of Eighth Air Force. But Garcia misses that Doolittle Penn.: Casemate Publishers, 2019. Photographs. Drawings. brought a philosophical mindset that changed the air war Illustrations. Maps. Pp. 160. $42.95. ISBN: 978-152674098- for Bomber Command and Eighth Air Force. He unleashed 4 the American storm over Europe by prioritizing destruc- tion of the Luftwaffe on a par with destruction of indus- Innumerable authors have produced books on RAF trial, transportation, and fuel targets. A decimated Bomber Command’s and the U.S. Eighth Air Force’s strate- Luftwaffe would bring the war ever closer to an ending. gic bombing offensive against the Third Reich during In a brief analysis offered as a summary, Garcia finds World War II. Most focus on the desired outcome of the of- the USAAF contributed more directly to Allied victory in fensive, or the men and machines who participated in the Europe than their RAF counterparts. But both services campaign. And most have a strong opinion on the effort paid a tremendous price for their efforts in both aircraft and its outcome. Garcia is no different; but I hoped, since and aircrew losses. On one mission, Bomber Command lost he is neither a British nor American national, that his per- more aircrew than all the RAF pilots lost during the en- spective might avoid the nationalist approach many other tirety of the Battle of Britain. The RAF and its Common- authors take. His book is divided into sections on Bomber wealth partners could not sustain those losses regardless Command and U.S. Army Air Forces with some ancillary of the civilian casualties Harris inflicted. information on the Luftwaffe opposition. Storm Over Europe is an excellent entry-level intro- Despite some Ministry of Defence experience, Garcia duction to the Allied strategic bombing campaign in Eu- is not an apologist for Bomber Command or its senior lead- rope. The book is printed on quality stock that shows the ership. He is highly critical of Air Marshalls Peirce and many photographs and illustrations to full advantage. Harris: Peirce for his failure to prepare and equip Bomber Most aircraft are depicted with graphics to explain their Command for its mission, and Harris for allowing his vis- capabilities, an invaluable resource to the novice aviation ceral hatred of the Germans to influence his prosecution historian. of the war. Garcia describes the use of area bombing tactics as growing out of technical and training shortfalls at the Gary Connor, docent, Smithsonian National Air and Space war’s beginning. But he makes clear that Harris’s contin- Museum’s Udvar Hazy Center ued use of area bombing when the tide of war had shifted was nothing short of terror tactics designed to produce NNNNNN massive German civilian casualties. He acknowledges their disruptive effect on the German war effort but also points Beyond the Quagmire: New Interpretations of the out that area bombing came at a disproportionate cost in Vietnam War. By Geoffrey W. Jensen and Matthew M. men and material. The effect of conducting these missions Stith, eds. Denton Texas: University of North Texas Press, with their attendant heavy losses took a heavy toll on RAF 2019. Index. Notes. Maps. Photographs. Pp xii, 425. $29.95 crew morale. ISBN: 978-157441748-7. Garcia paints the US contributions in much broader strokes, including the missions of Ninth and Twelfth Air I read this book with anticipation, knowing how diffi- Forces. He describes early Eighth Air Force efforts to con- cult a task it has been for the past 50 years to make any

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 53 sense of the Vietnam War. As a combat veteran of the most acteristics of the war and do not necessarily reinforce each intense year of the war, I continue to look for answers to other. The topics are, however, interesting and give clarity the whys of the war and, ultimately, its impact on America. to issues and the various elements of the war and their im- Many Americans of that era believe the war should never pact. I suspect that readers will be enlightened by the have been fought; others are certain that the war was lost scholarship behind the essays and see the war in a clearer in Washington and not on the battlefield. Adding to the context. controversy is President Johnson’s acknowledgement, as early as 1964 and before he significantly escalated the war, John Cirafici, Milford DE, recipient of a National Endow- that he could not see the way ahead to victory. ment for the Humanities fellowship researching the “Viet- A similar dilemma faced the writers of this book’s es- nam War and its Legacy” says: how were they to make any sense of the war and its aftermath. They followed new directions and ideas to as- NNNNNN sess 13 different aspects divided between the politics of war, the combatants and their war, and remembering Viet- KAIS: A True Story of a Daring Rescue in the nam. This collection pursues diverse subjects ranging from Swamps of New Guinea, Summer 1944. By Bas China’s direct participation in the war and the conse- Kreuger. Leiden, The Netherlands: Kinsbergen Publishing quences, the impact of topography on the American way of (independent), 2020. Maps. Photographs. Appendix. Illus- war, and how American soldiers in the conflict connected trations. Notes. Glossary. Bibliography. Pp. v, 254. $15.50 popular songs to their experiences. paperback, $9.90 Kindle. ISBN: 978-862874445-1

One essay provides insights to South Vietnam’s president Bas Kreuger is a Dutch historian and museum curator. Ngo Dinh Diem’s nation building efforts and why they He has written the fascinating World War II story of the failed to win over the peasants. loss of an American B–25 deep in the heart of Japanese- Another examines the lasting impact of the war on Laos, held Dutch New Guinea, the daring rescue of the crew, and where more bombs were dropped than all the ordnance the search decades later for the wreck. dropped in World War II. It examines especially the But Kreuger does more than tell that. In a remarkably US’s duplicitous post-war policies towards the Hmong, compact text, he also gives his readers an excellent picture its erstwhile allies during the secret war in Laos. of the conditions under which Gen Kenney’s Fifth AF op- A well written essay examines controversial Project erated while also laying out what the overall background 100,000, explaining its societal motives beyond simply of the war in that theater and how the Fifth contributed to recruiting soldiers for the Vietnam War, and its impact the victory. on both the military and the individual. Primarily, this is the story of one mission of a B–25H There is a discussion in one essay of the five-years-long assigned to the 418th Night Fighter Squadron. Taking off peace negotiations in Paris that identifies the root from Wakde on July 27, 1944, the crew’s mission was to at- causes for intransigence on both sides. tack Japanese shipping on the western side of the Vogelkop One essay addresses the strategic considerations behind (Birdshead) Peninsula. These costal barges and ships were Nixon’s goal to significantly increase Saigon’s rural the only way the Japanese could reinforce and resupplye population control in the wake of a vacuum created by their far-flung and separated units. Lt “Herky” Barnett and the National Liberation Front’s incredible losses in the his crew of three bombed a barge but were themselves hit, 1968 Tet offensive. This would, in turn, strengthen the losing power in the left engine. After it became apparent US position at the Paris Peace Talks. the B–25 couldn’t reach any friendly bases, Barnett put it A different essay is focused on social activism in America down in a swamp near a tributary of the Kais River—the driven by the war and its impact. “Women, Gender, and Sigi. The four crewmen pulled themselves out of the wreck- the War” proved interesting because it not only dis- age and set up “camp” on the wing of the aircraft. Another cussed the military’s female participants but also of their B–25s spotted the wreckage and began what be- touched on the war experiences of all women sent to came one of the strangest rescue tales of the war. In a re- Vietnam, including journalists and “Donut Dollies.” markable effort, an eclectic group of men supported by The essay on Chinese intervention in the war is an eye- USAAF OA–10 Catalinas and local natives paddled up the opener. Beyond aid by both the Chinese and Russians Kais and Sigi Rivers, camped in some of the worst terrain in the billions of dollars, both countries posted large in the world, found the crew, and brought them out. Mean- numbers of troops within North Vietnam and shot while, part of the ground force was several days down- down over a thousand American aircraft. stream at one of the few villages keeping a large Japanese force from interfering. They had their own battle. After re- The essays are heavily footnoted, leaving no doubt that turning by canoes down the river to the village, the four there was a great deal of supporting research done. The es- men were taken by Catalina to Biak on August 19, having says naturally stand alone while examining different char- spent nearly three weeks in the swamp or on the river.

54 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 After R&R in Australia, they returned to fight again in P– nologies (e.g., forward swept wings as early as 1944) and 61 Black Widows. awkward failures that really show the breadth of thought Kreuger gives short and fitting background informa- in early jet-aircraft design. tion on all of the key players in this drama: the aircrew, The book is organized by country (Germany, Great Dutch, Australian, American, Malay, white locals, and na- Britain, USA, France, and the USSR). The narratives pro- tives—both civilian and military. Despite horrible condi- vide a brief history of that country’s bomber development tions and circumstances, they pulled off an amazing rescue. leading to and including these early jets. There are the That is Part I. Part II of the book is an equally inter- more well-known types (e.g., American B–47 and B–52, esting account of how Kreuger and others rediscovered and British V-bombers, and Soviet Tu–16) but also experimen- put together this story. After exhaustive research and con- tal types such as the German Junkers Ju 287 (forward- tact with as many knowledgeable people as possible, they swept wing), British Short SA.4 (twin wing-mounted set out to find the aircraft. An expedition in January 2019, engines stacked atop each other), and American XB–51 got them close, but they could not find the wreckage. What (engines slung under the forward fuselage). This broad cov- they did was figure out how to do it better at a later date. erage makes for an informative and interesting read. Next time, Kreuger and his friends will be better equipped There are a few issues, however. Factual errors are few and prepared. I wish them luck. but egregious. Marriot claims that Billy Mitchell was court- This book is a real page turner. Far less has been writ- martialed as a result of the 1921 bombing trials where his ten about combat operations in this bleak part of the world forces sank the German battleship Ostfriesland. This made than about Europe or the Central Pacific. This book—while him unpopular with Navy admirals, but Mitchell was ac- covering only one little episode of the New Guinea opera- tually court-martialed in 1925 after publicly accusing mil- tions—substantially adds to the body of information about itary leaders of misadministration. There is a statement MacArthur’s area of operations. that the B–36 made its maiden flight on “8 August 1946, one year to the day after the first atomic bomb had been Col Scott A. Willey, USAF (Ret), Book Review Editor, and dropped on Hiroshima.” Hiroshima was bombed on August Docent, NASM’s Udvar-Hazy Center 6. One has to wonder what other information could be in error. More information on several points would have been NNNNNN welcome. He talks about the B–45’s engines being more re- liable on other aircraft but offers no explanation as to why. Early Jet Bombers: 1944-1954. By Leo Marriott. York- Also, he notes the XB–46 had pneumatically driven con- shire: Pen and Sword Aviation, 2019. Illustrations. Photo- trols but gives no explanation as to the significance of this graphs. Bibliography. Pp. 157. $26.95 paperback. ISBN: design. These are minor deficiencies, however. 978-1-52675-389-2 Overall this book provides excellent coverage of a lesser-known aspect of airpower development, and the Early Jet Bombers provides a look at aircraft such as wealth of photos makes it enjoyable and interesting. Its the American B–45 Tornado, British Canberra, and Russ- price is not unreasonable; and, for students of the era or ian IL–28. While important, these are usually overshad- the military transition from props to jets, it is worth the owed by their more well-known fighter counterparts of the money. era. These aircraft and others discussed mark an impor- tant stage in the development of airpower that would help Golda Eldridge, Lt Col, USAF (Ret), EdD defend their respective nations during the expanding Cold War and help maintain the balance of power as nuclear NNNNNN weapons and their delivery systems came to dominate strategic thinking. Bait: The Battle of Kham Duc. By James D. McLeroy Marriot is a retired professional air traffic controller and Gregory W. Sanders. Havertown Penn.: Casemate Pub- and private pilot who has written numerous other books lishers, 2019. Maps. Appendices. Photographs. Illustra- on early jets and aircraft. His passion for his subject is ev- tions. Glossary. Bibliography. Index. Pp. xx, 251. $34.95 ident. The breadth of coverage and detail included make ISBN: 978-1-61200-812-7 this a genuine resource. The book is a pictorial history with brief chapter narratives and extensive captions supple- McLeroy and Sanders are highly experienced combat menting and complementing the narrative and explaining veterans of the Vietnam War with firsthand knowledge of the aircraft, their variations, and development. The em- the lay of the land at Kham Duc and—in James McLeroy’s phasis is on aircraft design and capabilities vs. operational case—the battle itself, These perspectives bring a great employment. One of the best features is inclusion of exper- deal of credibility to their discussion of the battle. Their imental and conceptual aircraft that never made it into book represents an historical account as it should be pre- production and, in some cases, never made it off the draw- sented: informed, well researched, intelligently written, ing boards. These aircraft show some groundbreaking tech- and very readable, while avoiding the pitfalls of hype. As a

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 55 writer, I envied McLeroy’s and Sanders’ easy-to-follow road later in Kosovo for humanitarian aid for the UN World map leading the reader from the war in general to the day Food Program. of the battle. They smoothly knit together the separate Pike introduces the book with his transition in 1981 to events taking place as the massed enemy closed on the rotorcraft, training to fly Sikorsky 61-Ns to North Sea oil airstrip. rigs as a civilian pilot. This story sets the scene for the rest While reviewing this book, I benefitted from firsthand of the narrative, featuring stories by fellow pilots about the accounts of my teammates in Vietnam and fellow veterans helicopters and missions they flew. The overarching theme of the earlier battle of Khe Sanh, Sergeants Mort Freed- of the book is a collection of remembrances and recollec- man and Jim Lundie. At Kham Duc, they were the very tions about their experiences in types such as the Chinook, last to be lifted out of an already-abandoned base as it was Sea Hawk, Huey, Sea King, Osprey, and Wessex. The vi- overrun; while I was, at that same instant, on a parallel gnettes feature rich descriptions and details about mis- operation to the north in the A Shau Valley. Consequently, sions, techniques and skills, and historical backdrops about I could second so much of what the authors describe, As a politics and wars, ranging from the Indo/Pakistani and historian of that era, I was doubly impressed with the man- Falklands Wars to sea rescues and medical evacuations. ner in which they provide the necessary background to un- They take place in Australia, Nigeria, Scotland, Germany, derstanding why events at Kham Duc unfolded as they did. Argentina, and other sites. Pike concludes the book with Many readers who are not very familiar with the Viet- his most recent experience helping distribute food in 1999 nam War (and, in particular, the events of this book which in Kosovo as part of the United Nations humanitarian took place over fifty years ago), will greatly appreciate the work. authors’ highly informative lead-in to the 1968 Tet Offen- Each chapter of Helicopter Boys is a stand-alone text. sive and, in particular, the battle for Kham Duc. The very The vignettes feature actions by pilots framed in specific useful appendices supplementing the book’s text further wartime or peacetime contexts. Vignettes range from a cou- explain the strategies of the opposing forces; the units in- ple of paragraphs to five pages in length. The organization volved at Kham Duc; the tactical aspects of the battle; and, of the chapters was a bit difficult to follow, since they were ultimately, the nature of warfare in Vietnam. The excellent not written in chronological order, clustered by region or maps and illustrations provide additional clarity to the country, or grouped by missions. For example, a chapter de- narrative. scribing a medical evacuation (with a happy ending), pre- McLeroy and Sanders accurately capture the chaos of cedes a chapter on a very tragic incident that occurred on battle and the heroics of those in contact with a determined a North Sea oil rig with a large loss of life. This was fol- enemy. They highlight the impact of an inexcusably dys- lowed by a chapter about oil rig construction in Sumatra, functional chain of command on the ground and confused where the helicopter pilot and crew survived a harrowing command and control while in the midst of a developing crash caused by an incorrectly fitted bonding strip. This se- battle, both of which placed the troops in grave danger. quencing is a bit distracting, jumping from topic to topic This is more than simply an account of an obscure bat- without any framing commentary or transition. Pike also tle in the Vietnam War. It is one more important piece of included a few vignettes with a humorous twist or unex- the puzzle helping to explain the dynamics of the conflict pected turn, such as how one S 61-N morphed into a large that led to America’s disillusionment with the war, espe- Van de Graaf generator that discharged when the ground cially in the aftermath of the Tet Offensive. crew approached the Sikorsky (startling the crew but with- This book is well worth reading and will leave lasting out major injuries). impressions about what the war in Vietnam was really Other chapters provide greater insights into the situ- like. ations and challenges faced by pilots trying to accomplish their missions, while also being empathetic to the soldiers John Cirafici, Milford Del. and civilian populations in these life-threatening contexts. In several cases, Pike provides background information NNNNNN and interpretations about political and historical factors framing wartime situations. This helps the reader better Helicopter Boys: True Tales from Operators of Mili- understand the circumstances surrounding missions. tary and Civilian Rotorcraft. By Richard Pike. London: The high-quality color photographs feature some of the Grub Street, 2018. Photographs. Diagram. Index. Pp. 175. pilots discussed in the chapters (but are not referenced or $35.00. ISBN: 978-1-910690-55-0 cited in the narrative). The index is well done; and the book’s grammatical style, spelling, and photo captions are Richard Pike began his distinguished 40-year aviation without any errors or mistakes. All in all, the book is very career in 1961 at the Royal Air Force College. During his professional in appearance. career in the RAF, he flew the Lightning and the F–4. After Pike’s stories are intended to represent a cross section leaving military service, he became a civilian helicopter pi- of life as a helicopter pilot. In a limited respect, he accom- lots. Pike flew helicopters during the Falklands War and plishes this goal. The strengths of his writing lie in the lit-

56 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 eral short-story format, providing a quick and easy read. making the people and places seemingly more real than However, as mentioned before, the stories do not have com- black-and-white photos do. The color plates are nicely done mon themes (other than the obvious theme of rotorcraft and include all varieties of Luftwaffe aircraft (transports, pilot) and are not organized to build on each other. As I read bombers, fighters, and reconnaissance). the short chapters, I kept waiting to see some form of com- There are some issues which center on how informa- mentary or perspective that would illustrate how the sto- tion is presented. A glossary would have helped, as the unit ries were connected, along with sharing any wisdom or organizational tables have no legend. A reader unfamiliar insights about rotorcraft and pilots that highlight why with Luftwaffe unit designations has no idea what the ab- these stories are unique hallmarks for aviation history. One breviations mean. Tables for each campaign compare avail- other minor complaint is that the technical details may be able German and Allied airpower, but the German side of too elaborate for the general reader to stay interested or the table shows aircraft numbers available/serviceable, engaged throughout the text. However, in general, the book while the Allied side shows only units with no numbers. will appeal to helicopter pilots or other enthusiasts who There is no mention at all of Italian air strength and its will appreciate the details about the mechanics and flying potential impact (or lack thereof). This is critically impor- maneuvers described. tant, because Roba emphasizes the impact the numerical disparity had on the Luftwaffe’s performance but never P. E. Simmons, Ph.D., docent, Smithsonian National Air & shows what it actually is. The maps appear useful but, in Space Museum reality, name only towns and not airfields; so it is difficult to picture where aircraft were based. NNNNNN One very positive aspect that to some degree balances these shortcomings is Roba’s discussion of the contentious The Luftwaffe in Africa 1941-1943. Jean-Louis Roba. issue of aerial victory claims. While he doesn’t deliver any Oxford, UK: Casemate, 2019. Maps. Tables. Diagrams. Il- definitive answers, his recognition and discussion of the lustrations. Photographs. Bibliography. Index. Pp. 128. issue speak to his objectivity. Another plus is Casemate’s $24.95 paperback. ISBN: 978-1-61200-745-8 inclusion of color-coded tabs on the outside edge of the pages corresponding to the various chapters. These allow Roba has made it his life’s work to seek out and publi- a reader to quickly find a desired time period. cize lesser known people, units, aircraft, and campaigns of This book delivers on its title’s promise. It is certainly World War II. He has written over 80 books and many ar- worth the price. The book is also available in a digital edi- ticles in various magazines. His latest and thoroughly in- tion for those who prefer their books via the computer. teresting and well-done work is part of the Casemate Illustrated series that focuses on men, battles, and Golda Eldridge, Lt Col, USAF (Ret), EdD weapons: it delivers on all three counts. The emphasis is on pictures—and lots of them. One sees the faces of not NNNNNN only pilots, but also the ground crew as they service and prep the aircraft for combat. Color plates are a boon to Lone Wolf: The Remarkable Story of Britain’s Great- modelers looking to create authentic reproductions of these est Nightfighter Ace of the Blitz –Flt Lt Richard aircraft. Playne Stevens DSO, DFC & BAR. By Andy Saunders Organized chronologically, the book starts with the and Terry Thompson. London: Grub Street, 2019. Photo- failed Italian offensives in North Africa that prompted graphs. Appendices. Bibliography. Index. Pp. 160. $25.33. Hitler to dispatch the Afrika Corps to bolster the fortunes ISBN: 978-1-911621-34-8 of his unfortunate ally. It then covers the various 1941-43 campaigns that rolled across the African desert, including In 1986, researcher Terry Thompson asked historian the Luftwaffe’s efforts against both Commonwealth forces Andy Saunders whether there were any well-known RAF in the east and Americans in the west. The focus is on the aces who had never been properly written about. Sanders pilots, aircraft, and units, with a heavy emphasis on the pi- immediately named Hurricane pilot Richard Playne lots. The narrative reads like a unit diary; it is relatively Stevens. Over twenty-five years, Thompson had amassed terse and concentrates on unit designations and losses. In- “a dozen or more bulging lever-arch files (nothing was dividual pilot aces, award winners, and commanders are stored electronically)” that were “the most remarkable highlighted. archive I have ever seen on a single RAF pilot,” Sanders While the book covers the major offensives and troop says. Thompson died while the two men were sorting the movements, there is little discussion of aerial strategy or voluminous handwritten notes, but he had willed the tactics. Given the book’s brevity, this is understandable but archive to Saunders who used it to write this book. regrettable. Photo captions are typically short and direct The biography covers Stevens’ activities from his birth but are clear and add to the reader’s knowledge and un- in Kent, England, in 1909, to his death during a solo in- derstanding. Roba unearthed a fair number of color photos, truder mission against Gilze-Rijen airfield, Netherlands,

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 57 in 1941. The book’s strength is lengthy quotations from ob- In this book, he changes direction by highlighting more servers of Stevens’ accomplishments supplemented with than 220 images from France during aviation’s formative after-battle reports of his 15.5 aerial victories. This wealth years. More than likely this was a “backburner” project of information forms a well-defined picture of Stevens’ in- since Simons discovered a collection of more than 500 im- dividualistic approach to life as a warrior and as a man. ages many years ago. Meticulously combing contemporary Stevens’ combat mostly occurred during the second sources such as aviation journals of the day, he provides half of the nighttime 1940-1941 London Blitz by the Luft- the reader with a peek at what many would call those mag- waffe. His air-to-air tactics greatly differed from practices nificent men and their flying machines. of the day. Following his own impulses, he randomly flew After a brief introduction, the images appear in the fol- his black-painted Hurricane at night as a single ship in lowing sequence: expositions, lighter-than-air, pioneers, air- search of the enemy, which earned him the “Lone Wolf” so- fields, seaplanes, and post-World War I. The vast majority briquet. of the images deal with experimental or private flying. Nightfighting against German bombers was a difficult Fewer than twenty are directly associated with military task. Winter weather and limited technical support com- aviation. pounded the problem of simply finding the enemy. Stevens The section devoted to pioneers is by far the richest formulated personalized tactics based on his superior night with about 120 images, more than eighty of which are vision, consummate marksmanship, and willingness to unique aircraft. The selection includes some failures. take risks. With some sort of dispensation—official or oth- Throughout the book, he sprinkles in technical data. In ad- erwise—Stevens flew and fought how he saw fit, according dition, he introduces the reader to stories behind some of to one of his commanders. When Stevens transferred be- the prominent names in early aviation. When applicable, tween squadrons, he took his Hurricane with him. Reading he mentions how some of the better-known French aircraft accounts of his exploits is stunningly entertaining. manufacturers evolved. He fearlessly followed a quest to destroy Germans. For While the seaplane and post-war sections feature rel- example, flying above East London with an open cockpit to atively few aircraft, they nevertheless have important sto- improve visibility, he chased a Dornier 17 from an altitude ries to tell. Readers are introduced to the beginning of of 19,000 feet to 30,000 feet, from where both pilots dove French naval aviation. The seaplane races at Monaco re- practically vertically to 3000 feet before Stevens scored a ceive considerable attention. In the post-war section, three kill. In the dive, he temporarily blacked out from excessive images from 1921 depict French efforts to fly a Voisin by G-force. The all-out maneuver grounded the Hurricane and remote control—albeit with a safety pilot on board. caused Stevens to endure three flightless weeks while re- Because France was the center of world aviation before covering from a damaged eardrum. World War I, enthusiasts from other nations located there. Not only is the book’s storytelling excellent, but its In addition, the prestige of flying events hosted by the hardcover construction is top quality. Its heavy paper has French attracted aircraft from elsewhere. While relatively a permanency pleasant to touch, and its layout is pleasing few in number, there is a scattering of American, British, to the eye. Plentiful and exceptionally sharp photographs German, and Italian aircraft images. portray people and scenes from long ago. One of the challenges of producing aviation picture For Saunders, however, time is nearly timeless. Like books is balancing text and images especially with space the best historians, his prose makes everything sound as limitations usually defined by the publisher. In this in- if it happened yesterday. His career resume shows 35 years stance, Simons admirably achieves a comfortable mix. of studying the 1939-1945 air war over Europe and writing However, following the text would have been much easier 22 books about that period. This book is certainly among if the captions were defined as such, perhaps with a differ- his best. ent font. In some cases, the two run together, creating a dis- traction that could have been avoided. Henry L. Zeybel, Lt Col, USAF (Ret), Austin TX Perhaps because of the aforementioned possible space limitations, the book lacks a critical element—an index of NNNNNN aircraft and personalities—that would make it far more useful as a valuable reference work. While Simons claims Early French Aviation: 1905-1930. By Graham M. Si- all the images came from a private collection and are pub- mons. Havertown Penn.: Pen & Sword Books (Air World), lished for the first time, there are some possible exceptions 2019. Photographs. Pp. 128. $24.95 paperback. ISBN: 978- such as exposition posters and personality shots. If such 152675874-3 is the case, then the exceptions could have been easily noted. Graham Simons was formerly the engineering director These nitpicks are minor given the incredible research for the East Anglican Aviation Society (one of the world’s effort that went into this book. Quality publications on finest historical-aviation organizations) and has written French aviation, especially for this time period, are rarely more than fifteen books, mostly detailing a specific aircraft. found in English. Simons has produced a real gem—a work

58 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 that should be of great interest to anyone curious about harder to locate and interview them. Further, surviving early aviation. records exist in four different languages in the archives of Hungary, Germany, Russia, and the US (to gain direct ac- Steven D. Ellis, USAFR (Ret), Lt Col, docent, Museum of cess, he learned German, Russian, and English). Flight, Seattle Stenge’s academic credentials are impressive and his process is very methodical and thorough. He used sources NNNNNN from all combatants and relied to a great extent on first person accounts. There is a good glossary and many pic- Forgotten Heroes: Aces of the Royal Hungarian Air tures of both people and aircraft. Force in the Second World War. By Csaba B. Stenge. The book’s biggest weakness is context. There is no ex- Warwick UK: Helion & Co., 2019. Photographs. Maps. Ta- planation or discussion of how the Hungarian Air Force fit bles. Diagrams. Notes. Illustrations. Glossary. Bibliography. into the larger picture of the war or how the shifting polit- Pp. xii, 438. $58.52. ISBN: 978-1-911512-68-4 ical situation in Hungary affected the military. The reader picks this up in pieces from the individual entries; but, This book’s purpose is to preserve the memory and his- without outside knowledge of Hungary in World War II, it torical record of Hungarian pilots flying for the Axis who is confusing. A chapter covering this with appropriate downed at least five enemy planes. Stenge, a Hungarian, maps would be very helpful. feels the world has forgotten these men and has taken it Stenge unfortunately makes some unsupported claims upon himself to correct this. about American aviators The first is that Fifteenth AF The book starts with forwards from a surviving ace fighter pilots frequently strafed enemy pilots in their para- and from the son of the highest scoring ace. The first third chutes after they bailed out. He says several Hungarian of the book then includes information intended to help the pilots suffered this fate. This comment is made as if it were reader better understand aspects of air combat and things an accepted fact without any source to support it. The sec- specific to the Hungarian military. He discusses what con- ond claim is that Americans were more prone to overclaim stitutes an aerial victory, tactics and combat methods, dec- kills than anyone, again with no supporting documenta- orations, ranks, personnel and units; and Hungarian tion. This argument is actually contradicted by his own dis- organizations—all of which is definitely useful. cussion elsewhere that all American aircraft had gun In the entry for the first ace, he discusses the confusion cameras (which the Russians and Hungarians did not), so of air combat and makes the point that assessing a kill is they would have documentary evidence of any claims. not always as clear cut as one would assume. His extensive These weaknesses are significant, but anyone inter- discussion of what constitutes an aerial victory explains ested in this subject will never find a more complete source: the approach of various countries and the process he used no other researcher will ever take the time or combine the when there were questions about the validity of a claim. tools shown here. If this is something you want to know He credits non-fighter aces with kills when anyone on their about, this book is where to find it. plane shot something down. Unfortunately this is not ex- plained in the discussion of aerial victories, and the infor- Golda Eldridge, Lt Col, USAF (Ret), EdD mation is found only in a photo caption toward the end of the book. NNNNNN The fliers are arranged like an encyclopedia—grouped by aircraft type and then victory total. It starts with fighter They’re Killing My Boys: The History of Hickam pilots who achieved more than 20 victories, then more than Field and the Attacks of 7 December 1941. By J. 10, then more than 5. He also includes reconnaissance, Michael Wenger, Robert J. Cressman, and John F. Di Vir- bomber, and ground attack pilots and then a few aces of gilio. Annapolis Md.: Naval Institute Press, 2019. Maps. Hungarian descent who flew with other militaries (includ- Photographs. Bibliography. Notes. Index. Pp. 272. $42.00. ing the USAAF). Each entry gives essential data and a nar- ISBN: 978-168247458-7 rative. The narratives are solid, with interesting facts about the ace and often of a victim or the one who bested This is one of a series of books from the Naval Institute the ace. This adds personal interest to what otherwise Press providing a detailed study of the Japanese attacks could be a dry recitation of facts. on the island of Oahu on December 7, 1941. Though there Without question, Stenge devoted an extraordinary are many books on Pearl Harbor, most tend to focus (as did amount of time and effort to his research. His biggest chal- the Japanese attackers) on the U.S. Navy’s Pacific Fleet, lenge was the paucity of records: many were lost or de- including Battleship Row and the USS Arizona. Many au- stroyed in the chaos at the war’s end, and the postwar thors provide only a brief description of what transpired at Hungarian communist regime had no incentive to preserve the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps airfields on Oahu. This the records of pilots who flew for the Axis. Also, many sur- book on the attacks of Hickam Field that Sunday morning viving witnesses fled Hungary after the war making it and companion volumes on Naval Air Station (NAS) Ka-

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 59 neohe Bay and NAS Pearl Harbor help fill that gap. Aero-Neurosis: Pilots of the First World War and the Hickam Field was established in 1935, but Army avi- Psychological Legacies of Combat. By Mark C. ation in Hawaii dates to World War I and the use of Luke Wilkins. Havertown, Penn.: Pen and Sword, 2019. Photo- Field on Ford Island. By 1941, Hickam Field was the Head- graphs. Bibliography. Notes. Pp. 162. $39.95. ISBN: 978-1- quarters of the Hawaiian Air Force, comprising two major 52672-312-3 tactical units: the 18th Bombardment Wing and the 14th Pursuit Wing. The authors provide a detailed history of This groundbreaking book explores the effects of combat Hickam Field, the Hawaiian Air Force defense posture on fatigue on World War I fighter aces Elliot White Springs, the eve of the Pearl Harbor attacks, and the day-to-day ex- William Lambert, Roy Brown, Ernst Udet, “Mick” Man- periences of officers and enlisted personnel both on and off nock, and Georges Guynemer. Wilkins exploits official base. As one Army Air Corps officer recalled, new arrivals records and personal correspondence to recount the had been delivered to the “land of coconuts and swinging painstaking efforts of doctors, military leadership, and the hula girls.” pilots themselves to recognize symptoms and develop The overall story of the Japanese strikes on Oahu are treatments for what they dubbed “aero-neurosis.” A prolific well known, but the authors provide a comprehensive, first- World War I military aviation historian, Wilkins writes au- hand description of the devastation that overtook Hickam thoritatively of air combat strategies, tactics, aircraft, and Field. Both American and Japanese (where available) ac- aces. He avoids jargon and complicated medical theories, counts are included, including a list of the Japanese air- letting the story unfold in lively, unfettered combat ac- crews assigned to attack Hickam Field with an individual’s counts that make gripping reading. photograph. From attempts to save damaged aircraft, to The first few chapters outline the birth of combat avi- fighting back with small arms, the response by military ation as part of the maturation of warfighting technology members and civilians caught completely off guard is de- that characterized World War I. Aerial warfare-induced tailed. Probably the best known incident was the arrival combat fatigue was a novel phenomenon that took time to in the midst of the first attack wave of a flight of Boeing identify and treat. Military commanders wrestled with no- B–17 Flying Fortress bombers from California. Destined tions of cowardice vs. bravery. Physicians prescribed rest. for the Philippines, the unarmed B–17s had to scatter to Combatants tried to relieve stress through hobbies, leaves, land at fields all over Oahu. After the second Japanese at- and writing correspondence and diaries. They affected an tack wave departed, Hickam Field began the slow recovery air of jaunty cheer and bonded with fellow pilots experi- process—fighting fires and tending to casualties. As did the encing the same horrors. In what now is recognized as a Navy, the Army Air Corps also sent out surviving aircraft classic psychological indicator, they embraced the source of to search for the Japanese fleet, but to no avail. their fear, living “only for the battle.” On leave in his home- Today, more than seventy years after the Pearl Harbor town, Ernst Udet was startled to realize that he wanted attack, Hickam AFB (now part of Joint Base Pearl Harbor- nothing more than to return to his unit. Elliott White Hickam) is the Headquarters of the Pacific Air Forces and Springs noted that despite being a “total nervous wreck” home to the 15th Wing (C–17s and F–22s) and the Hawaii after months of combat, he wanted “to stay at the Front at Air National Guard’s 154th Wing (F–22s and KC–135s). all costs.” Unconsciously, they took extreme risks that could Many of the buildings and hangars date to World War II, result in a release from the stress—death. After Guyne- and one can still see preserved damage from the Japanese mer’s demise at the hands of an enemy plane’s rear gunner, attacks. observers noted that normally he would have maneuvered This book is a well-illustrated and detailed account of in the blind spot behind and below it. Violating one of his Hickam Field’s searing experience on December 7, 1941. I own air combat precepts, Mannock followed a victim too highly recommended it to those interested in knowing low and was shot down by ground fire. more about that “date that will live in infamy.” Despite Wilkins’ adroit arguments regarding “air neu- As a docent at the National Air and Space Museum’s rosis” as new and unique, a World War I infantry soldier Udvar-Hazy Center, I’m fortunate to show visitors an air- would argue that combat fatigue was hardly novel to air plane directly associated with Pearl Harbor. Though based combat. Indeed, combat fatigue is one of the better-docu- on Ford Island, our Sikorsky JRS-1 amphibious “Baby mented phenomena of war. Military doctors had been con- Clipper” is one of a handful of airplanes known to have sur- cerned with what now is termed post-traumatic stress vived the Japanese attack. It’s a fitting memorial to all disorder (PTSD) since ancient times. Diagnosis in the mod- those serving in Hawaii on that long-ago December morn- ern era traced to what US Civil War medics called “nostal- ing. gia.” Military leaders of World War I encountered “war neurosis” or “shell shock.” No effective solutions existed at Jeffrey P. Joyce, Major, USAF (Ret) first. The stigma attached to such stress disorders in those days resulted in men being confined; discharged; or, worse, executed for cowardice. Doctors experimented with electro- NNNNNN shock therapy with doubtful results. After the futile Battle

60 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 of the Somme, the military recognized combat fatigue as a Wilkinson structures his work around an interesting medical issue and no longer blamed victims for their con- coincidence. The birthdates of the Royal Air Force (1 April dition. Treatments evolved: soldiers went on leave, were 1918) the Soviet Union (Mar 1917) are proximate: these sent to convalescent centers, or were assigned duties in the two institutions share much of the twentieth century. He rear. A more cohesive description of this background would promises to show how their institutional stories interweave have provided context to the phenomenon of “aero neuro- throughout the twentieth century. His narrative focuses on sis” described in this book. Readers wanting such perspec- three broad events: British intervention in the Russian tive will find it in such works as Fiona Reid, Broken Men: Revolution supporting anti-Bolshevik forces; deployment Shell Shock, Treatment and Recovery in Britain, 1914-30 of Royal Air Force (RAF) units to prevent German Forces (2010), and Taylor Downing, Breakdown: The Crisis of Shell from capturing Murmansk; and, finally, the Cold War and Shock on the Somme (2016). The best basic works are prob- subsequent collapse of the Soviet Union. ably Stefanie Linden, They Called it Shell Shock: Combat The first section draws heavily on diaries and personal Stress in the First World War (2017), Anthony Babington, papers of actual participants. Wilkinson fills in gaps in the Shell Shock (1997), and Wendy Holden, Shell Shock: The story. Interestingly, the 1904 Kronstadt and 1905 Potemkin Psychological Impact of War (1998). mutinies in Russia had direct counterparts in the UK’s mil- Despite the title, this is an air power book. Its heart is itary establishment. A Royal Marines battalion deployed chapters devoted to the background, careers, and combat in Murmansk mutinied themselves. The combat was bru- experiences of each ace, related in detailed narratives of tal. British airmen were told that if captured by the Bolos searing, relentless World War I air combat. It hammers (slang for Bolsheviks), they should expect to be crucified; home the psychological effects of battle, affecting the sub- the Bolo’s using five nails, one for each extremity and a fifth jects’ professional and personal relationships, leadership for the genitals. In counterpoint, some of the main weapons styles, and health, told as much as possible in the words of employed by the RAF against the Bolos were chemical the pilots themselves through excerpts from letters and di- weapons. aries, eyewitness accounts, and contemporary interviews. In discussing RAF operations in Russia during the After reading just these chapters, the reader has an under- early stages of the Second World War, Wilkinson again re- standing of “aero-neurosis.” The book is worth the rather lies on personal papers and oral histories of veterans. He steep cover price for this portion alone. describes a Russia demanding increasing amounts of Although a few chapters relate the effect of advancing equipment from the UK while struggling to absorb totally technology on war, I missed context of the role of World War alien technologies. Inefficiencies are exacerbated by Russ- I fighter plane technology in the development of “aero-neu- ian winters and obdurate Russian bureaucrats. Wilkinson rosis.” The aircraft were technologically unsophisticated apportions a share of the responsibility to the RAF. He de- and had few safety features. Pilots knew there was no es- scribes early British efforts as “missionaries.” Wilkinson cape from a burning or damaged aircraft. Worse, the static makes one very important point: while many of the air- nature of the ground war often enabled victors to land and frames the RAF provided to Russia were considered inad- view the bodies of their victims. The book is especially equate under-performers (e.g., Mustang I, Albemarle, and strong at quoting the subjects’ thoughts but, otherwise, Stirling), these types could have been used by the RAF to leaves readers to learn the peculiarities of World War I dog- defend the Commonwealth’s global interests. The UK fighting on their own. placed its short-term security at risk to support a difficult Carefully selected photographs illustrate the aces and and demanding ally. their aircraft. A list of original sources would have been The book has a short chapter on the Berlin Airlift and helpful. Also, the bibliography is somewhat limited. It is aftermath. One anecdote discusses use of RAF Chipmunk puzzling that more of the numerous works published on training aircraft based in Berlin as intelligence-gathering these famous aces over the course of the last century were platforms. British intelligence created a “circuit” flight path not referenced. Overall, however, this book provides a trail- that passed as close as possible to Russian and German in- blazing description of the creation of the new medical sci- stallations. On one circuit, a Chipmunks got the first pho- ence of “air neurosis.” It is recommended reading for tographic evidence of Soviet SA-2 deployments in the GDR. anyone interested in the birth of airpower. Wilkinson takes great pride in noting that copies of the photos were on President Eisenhower’s desk within three Steve Agoratus, Hamilton NJ days of the photo shoot. The story ends with a relatively short discussion of NNNNNN RAF–Russian relations and events at the end of the 20th century. Wilkinson acknowledges that this section relies Red Star and Roundel: A Shared Century. By Philip heavily on his personal experience as an air attaché. This Wilkinson. Stroud UK: Fonthill Media. 2019. Photographs. final chapter is most disappointing. He set the stage and Illustrations. Notes. Bibliography. Maps. Pp. 400. $60.00 established his credibility to offer comparisons between the ISBN: 978-1-78155-7334 RAF and Russia at the beginning and end of the twentieth

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 61 century. Instead, the conclusion is a list of characters from most all in color, that show the aircraft, airmen, and facil- each segment of the book and their respective career paths ities. and honors. Wilkinson talks nothing of Russian resurgence Willmin devotes a chapter to air traffic control proce- in the face of RAF reductions. dures at Mildenhall and Lakenheath. This is an interesting Red Star and Roundel: A Shared Century is an uneven discussion, made more so by the fact that the two bases are and imbalanced book. Its reliance on diaries, personal pa- less than five miles apart, creating a challenge for con- pers, and official histories in early sections offer unique an- trollers to coordinate their operations. A map to show the ecdotes and insights. Later chapters lack that foundation reader how close together the two bases are and where and become less useful to the aviation historian and more they are in relation to the rest of the UK would have useful to RAF biographers. Numerous spelling mistakes helped. Perhaps even a map showing the overlapping ap- are unfortunate. proach and departure routes for the two bases could have been provided. Gary Connor, docent, Smithsonian National Air and Space Willmin wraps up the book with a summary chapter Museum’s Udvar Hazy Center that isn’t a summary of anything that precedes it. In this one-page conclusion, he talks about “disarray” in the US NNNNNN defense budget, continued active aggression by Russia, and the rise of the Islamic State. He says that more money is The United States Air Force in Britain. By Darren needed. One can agree or disagree with that statement, but Willmin. United Kingdom: Fonthill Media, 2019. Photo- as the conclusion of a book it should relate directly to, and graphs. Glossary. Bibliography. Pp. 223. $29 paperback. be supported by, what has been said in the preceding chap- ISBN: 978-1-78155-699-3 ters. There’s no connection whatsoever. This chapter left me scratching my head. In this book, Willmin has two objectives. First, he out- Whether Willmin’s or the editors fault, there are too lines the history of the USAF in the UK and continental many cases where careful proofreading of the text should Europe from the years immediately following World War have led to corrections or revisions, but clearly this didn’t II to the present day. And second, he presents an in-depth happen. Just a few examples will suffice. Willmin uses the discussion of current USAF bases, organizations, and op- term “dissimilar air combat” in quotes to indicate that it is erations in the UK. a unique term that requires explanation; unfortunately, he He begins with an historic narrative that discusses provides none. In describing a preflight briefing for a KC– strategic events (e.g., the Berlin Blockade and France’s de- 135 crew, he says the crew discussed ditching procedures parture from NATO’s military structure), tactical or oper- because ditching is, in Willmin’s words, “inevitable”; surely, ational matters (e.g., numbers and types of aircraft he meant to say something other than that. And lastly deployed to the UK at a given point in time), and trivial there are factual errors, the most glaring of which is the details (e.g., a description of the unit markings painted on statement that there was a U–2 base in the UK in 1952— the tails of deployed aircraft). This broad range of issues, several years before the legendary reconnaissance air- from the high-level to the miniscule, might be interesting plane’s first flight. and informative if presented clearly and coherently; but All told, this book addresses an interesting topic, and this is not the case. Rather, the reader sees a collection of it is evident there was a great deal of research. But miscellaneous facts that do not flow logically from one to Willmin’s ability to organize and present the material another and which lack sufficient context to allow for a leaves something to be desired. One is left with the impres- clear understanding of the story that is being told. From sion that this is a first draft rather than a finished prod- one paragraph to the next, the story was difficult to follow. uct. Today the USAF occupies active bases at RAF Milden- hall and RAF Lakenheath, and also maintains a standby LTC Joseph Romito, USA (Ret), docent, National Air and base at RAF Fairford. Mildenhall is home to the 100th Air Space Museum Refueling Wing, flying KC–135s, and the 352nd Special Operations Wing, flying C–130Js and CV-22s. The primary NNNNNN unit at Lakenheath is the 48th Fighter Wing, equipped with F–15s. Willmin devotes several chapters to each of the The Complete History of U.S. Cruise Missiles: From active bases, going into considerable detail on the nature Bug to Snark to Tomahawk. By Bill Yenne. Forest Lake of their missions and the aircraft they operate. This is the MN: Specialty Press, 2018. Maps. Tables. Diagrams. Illus- book’s greatest strength, in particular Willmin’s description trations. Photographs. Appendix. Index. Pp. 204. $34.95. of the aircraft types and variants stationed at the opera- ISBN: 978-1-58007-256-4 tional bases. A further strength is the outstanding collection of pho- As a writer, Yenne has three important characteristics: tographs. There are hundreds of high-quality photos, al- he is prolific, eclectic, and insatiably curious. His impres-

62 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 sive body of work includes nearly sixty non-fiction titles and testing of the two military services’ platforms. The and eight novels. His prolificacy and eclecticism are fed by Navy “flew” on top of a car driving eighty mph on the Long his wide-ranging curiosity and imagination. One reviewer Island Motor Parkway. The Army’s aircraft crashed into a stated that Yenne is “. . . a perfect example of what happens farmer’s field southeast of Dayton. When Army vehicles when a child reads too many books and doesn’t watch and officials arrived on the scene, the farmer noted there enough television. He ends up with an imagination.” Imag- was no sign of the pilot. Secrecy was paramount; and ination and curiosity feed off one another and generate Arnold, clad in leather flying jacket and goggles assured writing that is comprehensive and readable. the farmer that he had successfully bailed out of the air- This work meets these tests. It is wide-ranging, logi- craft. cally organized, and satisfying to read. It is notable from Although the Navy enthusiastically promoted devel- other works on the subject in that it is at once limited in opment of their aircraft, they met with few successes in scope to US cruise missiles but is comprehensive enough flight testing. The Army’s Kettering Bug was deemed ready to enable peripheral awareness of the broad scope of cruise for deployment in late 1918, but the armistice obviated its missiles globally. employment. Of course, Yenne’s is not the only book on cruise mis- Yenne’s first chapter notes developments in navigation siles, but ten other promising works currently in print do and control through the interwar years concluding with not cover the subject as broadly. Kenneth Werrell’s 1985 the US military’s reverse-engineering of Germany’s V-1 The Evolution of the Cruise Missile, and Norman Polmar “Buzz Bomb,” which were test fired but never operationally and John O’Connell’s 2020 Strike from the Sea: The Devel- employed. The rest of the book is an 11-chapter trek opment and Deployment of Strategic Cruise Missiles since through the chronological development of the first Air 1934, are both good, however. Werrell’s is more a strategic Force cruise missiles (Matador and Mace), through the overview of cruise missiles than a description of them. Pol- Navy’s Regulus, the Navaho, the Tomahawk to the twenty- mar and O’Connell provide extensive details on the Navy’s first century’s Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile Regulus missile program but limit coverage to sea- (JASSM) and the future Joint Strike Missiles (JSM) being launched weapons. tested today. Each of the missiles is described in detail, and Yenne provides detailed descriptions of twenty-five its evolution is effectively explained. The dots are con- U.S. cruise missile types dating from World War I to the fu- nected. ture. His opening chapter, a fascinating and interesting Illustrations and schematics are plentiful, and the narrative, covers developments to the end of World War II. prose and pictures are professional. Only three things are He writes about three talented geniuses—Elmer Sperry, lacking in this book: a more complete index, a bibliography, Peter Hewitt, and Charles Kettering—and how they influ- and a glossary. Each would be helpful in a second edition. enced the development of the first cruise missiles called It is hoped that Yenne will one day go beyond the U.S.-only flying bombs in the Navy and aerial torpedoes in the Army. story and provide a more global description of cruise mis- Each was a piston-powered, propeller-driven, unmanned siles. aircraft carrying high explosives. Sperry, who patented the gyrocompass in 1908 and, Todd Riebel, DoD (Ret), NASM Udvar-Hazy Center docent with his son Lawrence, the gyroscopic autopilot in 1912, was joined in 1915 by Hewitt, best known for inventing the mercury vapor lamp and the first non-mechanical rectifier to convert alternating current to direct current. Together they developed the Hewitt-Sperry Automatic Airplane based on applications of guidance technology installed on NNNNNN Curtiss C–2 flying boats and a Curtiss N–9. For the next two years, they experimented diligently but with limited results. Meanwhile, “Ket” Kettering, who had founded the Day- ton Engineering Laboratories Company (Delco) and devel- PROSPECTIVE REVIEWERS oped a wide range of automobile electrical devices, created Anyone who believes he or she is qualified to substan- his aerial torpedo for the Army. He was helped by Orville tively assess one of the new books listed above is invited Wright, who envisioned mass production by the Dayton- to apply for a gratis copy of the book. The prospective re- Wright Airplane Company. In fact, the Army contracted viewer should contact: with Dayton-Wright in January 1918 for twenty-five Day- Col. Scott A. Willey, USAF (Ret.) 46994 Eaker St ton-Wright Liberty Eagles. Overseeing the program for the Potomac Falls VA 20165 Army was a 1907 West Point graduate, Colonel Henry H. Tel. (703) 620-4139 “Hap” Arnold. e-mail: [email protected] Yenne writes entertainingly about the development

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 63 Compiled by George W. Cully

September 11-16, 2020 the Society’s website: https://www.history- the Hilton Salt Lake City Center in Salt The Air Force Association has cancelled oftechnology.org/annual-meeting/2020- Lake City, Utah. This year’s theme will be its 2020 Convention previously set for shot-annual-meeting-7-11-october-new- “The Presence and Persistence of Stories.” September 11-13 and instead will present orleans-louisiana/ For details, see the Council’s website at “AFA 20/20: a Celebration of Where We’ve https://ncph.org/conference/2021-annual- Been, Where We Are, and Where We’re October 20-25, 2020 meeting/. Going” in a virtual format followed by its The Oral History Association will hold annual Air, Space and Cyber Conference, its annual meeting in virtual form. For April 15-18, 2021 also to be offered in a virtual format. For more details, check the Association’s web- The Organization of American details, see the Association’s website at site at https://www.oralhistory.org/annual- Historians will hold its annual meeting https://www.afa.org/events. meeting/. and conference at the Sheraton Grand Hotel in Chicago, Illinois. The theme of September 23-26, 2020 October 24-25, 2020 this year’s gathering will be “Pathways to The Society of Experimental Test The League of World War I Aviation Democracy.” For further information, see Pilots will hold its 64th Symposium & Historians will hold its annual seminar their website at https://www.oah.org/meet- Banquet at Disney’s Grand Californian in Kansas City, Missouri, with planned ings-events/oah21/. Hotel & Spa in Anaheim, CA. For details, visits to the National Museum of World see the Society’s website at www.setp.org/ War I and Memorial. For more details as April 21-23, 2021 annual-symposium-banquet. they become available, see the League’s The Army Aviation Association of website at www.overthefront.com Ame rica will host its annual Mission September 24-25, 2020 Solutions Summit at the Gaylord Opry - The Society of Experimental Test October 26-28, 2020 land Hotel and Convention Center in Pilots will hold its annual Symposium in The American Astronautical Society Nashville, Tennessee. For more details as virtual form. For details, see the Society’s will host its annual Wernher von Braun they become available, see the Associa - website at https://www.setp.org/. Memorial Symposium at the University of tion’s website at https://s15.a2zinc.net/ Alabama in Huntsville. For additional clients/aaaa/aaaa21/Public/Enter.aspx. October 4, 2020 details, see the Society’s website at The National Aviation Hall of Fame https://astronautical.org/events/vonbraun/. July 7-10, 2021 will celebrate its 58th annual enshrine- The International Womens Pilot Asso-cia- ment at the Hope Hotel and Richard C. October 31-November 2, 2020 tion, better known as The Ninety-Nines, Holbrooke Conference Center in Dayton, The Space Foundation will host its 36th will hold their annual meeting on board Ohio. For additional information, see their annual Space Symposium at the Broad - the SS Queen Mary moored in the harbor website at https://www.nationalaviation. moor Hotel in Colorado Springs, Colorado. of Long Beach, California. For registration, org/enshrinement/. For registration and other details, see the see their website at https://travelplanners- Foundation’s website at www.spacesympo- texas.swoogo.com/99s2021/333555. October 5-8, 2020 sium.org/. The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International will pre- February 24-26, 2021 sent Xponential 2020, its premier annual The Air Force Association will host its In light of the coronavirus pandemic, convention, in virtual form. For more annual Air Warfare Symposium at the the events listed here may not happen details, see the Association’s website at Rosen Shingle Creek Hotel in Orlando, on the dates listed here, or at all. Be https://www.auvsi.org/events. Florida. For more information, see the sure to check the schedules listed on Association’s website at www.afa.org/events. the individual organization’s web October 7-11, 2020 sites for the latest information. The History of Science Society will hold March 18-21, 2021 its annual conference in New Orleans, The Society for Military History will Louisiana. For more details as they become hold its 87th annual meeting in Norfolk, available, see the Society’s website at Virginia. This year’s theme will be https://hssonline.org/meetings/annual- “Turning the Tide: Revolutionary Moments Readers are invited to submit listings of meeting-archive/. in Military History.” For additional details upcoming events Please include the name of the organization, title of the event, dates as they become available, see the Society’s and location of where it will be held, as well October 7-11, 2020 website at https://www.smh-hq.org/smh as contact information. Send listings to: The Society for Military History will 2021/index.html. George W. Cully hold its annual meeting at the Sheraton 3300 Evergreen Hill New Orleans hotel in New Orleans, March 24-27, 2021 Montgomery, AL 36106 Louisiana. Details regarding paper sub- The National Council on Public (334) 277-2165 mission and registration can be found at History will host its annual meeting at E-mail: [email protected]

64 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 History Mystery Answer

The Northrop F–89 Scorpion first flew in August 1948. and F–106) century series fighters would replace the F–89 Equipped with a AN/ARG-33 radar, and Hughes E-1 fire-con- as the U.S. Air Force’s primary air defender. The final F–89 trol system, along with permanently mounted wing-tip fuel would retire from the USAF in 1969 closing the book on tanks, the F–89 became the USAF’s first purpose built jet the Air Force’s only fighter to fire and detonate a nuclear interceptor. Operated by a crew of two (pilot and radar oper- air-to-air missile. As for the AIR–2 Genie, three aircraft ator), the Scorpion entered operational service in 1950. A would be made capable of carrying it: the F–89J, F–101B total of 1,050 Scorpions were produced. The final version: the and F–106A. The AIR–2 Genie would serve in the Air J model, was capable of carrying two AIR–2 Genie missile. Force’s inventory from the 1950s until the mid-1980s. The AIR–2 Genie was armed with a nuclear warhead for To learn more about: attacking large formations of Soviet bombers. On July 19, The F–89 and other U.S. aircraft: https://media.defense. 1957, a F–89 Scorpion fired a nuclear armed AIR–2 Genie air- gov/2010/May/26/2001330287/-1/-1/0/AFD-100526-027.pdf to-air rocket over the Yucca Flats test range. The air-to-air The F–89: https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/ rocket firing was the first and only time an air-to-air nuclear Museum-Exhibits/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/198080/ rocket was detonated. The test detonation was part of the northrop-f-89j-scorpion/ Operation Plumbbob nuclear test program. Each Plumbbob The AIR–2 Genie: https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/ test detonation was also given a second name to distinguish Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/ it from other test. This test detonation was called Operation 197594/mcdonnell-douglas-air-2a-genie-rocket/ Plumbbob John. As part of a public relations effort to show The Operation Plumbbob test: https://www.dtra.mil/ that a nuclear air-to-air missile could be safely detonated Portals/61/Documents/NTPR/1-Fact_Sheets/19_PLUMB- over U.S. cities, the Air Force had 5 volunteers and 1 camera- BOB.pdf man observe the test from ground zero below the detonation. To see video of the Operation Plumbbob John test shot: The more capable supersonic fighters (F–101, F–102 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VZ7FQHTaR4

AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 65 New History Mystery by Dan Simonsen

This issue’s quiz: At the beginning of the Cold War, the United States Air Force established Air Defense Command (ADC) to defend the United States from an air attack from the Soviet Union. To end the United States, ADC used a ring of ground radars and fighter interceptor aircraft. Initially ADC used P–61 and F–82 as its primary intercept air- craft. Both of these aircraft where inferior to the task at hand. This led the Air Force to procure a twin-engine jet aircraft to serve as an interceptor charged with the task of defending the United States against attack from Soviet bombers. This first purpose built jet interceptor would serve on active duty for over twenty years. This aircraft would take part in Operation Plumbbob John test shot; the first U.S. firing and detonation of a nuclear air-to-air rocket. Can you name the aircraft? Can you name the mis- sile?

66 AIR POWER History / FALL 2020 Air Force Historical Foundation P.O. Box 790 Clinton, MD 20735-0790

To: Air Force Historical Foundation P.O. Box 790 Clinton, MD 20735-0790

Visit Us Online at: www.afhistory.org

Know the Past, Shape the Future

AIR FORCE HISTORICAL FOUNDATION MEMBERSHIP FORM

NAME PHONE E-MAIL ______

STREET ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP

J Associate Membership ($25/year) (on-line magazine access) (Visit our Web site at www.afhistory.org) J Sustaining Membership ($45/year) GIFT FOR (NAME) J Gift Membership ($45/year) J Life Membership (Inquiries to the F oundation) ADDRESS Become a Patron or Contributor (Please ask) CITY STATE ZIP * Non-US recipients please add $8.00 for postage (See Web site for additional membership options)

J Check enclosed, payable in US Funds to Air Force Historical Foundation Send form, along with your remittance to: J Please charge my credit card (VISA/MasterCard/Discover) Air Force Historical Foundation CARD NUMBER: ______EXPIRATION DATE: ______P.O. Box 790 SIGNATURE: ______DATE: ______Clinton, MD 20735-0790